In De Sousa and Corporation interactive Eidos, 2026 QCTAT 4, the Quebec Administrative Labour Tribunal (ALT) appears to have broadened the scope of an employer’s obligation to prevent harassment. The decision arose from a complaint filed by a former employee who had been sexually assaulted at her home by a colleague following an office party organized by the employer. The Tribunal had to determine whether the event fell within the professional sphere and, if so, whether the employer had taken sufficient measures to prevent it. It also considered whether the employee, who was subsequently diagnosed with an anxiety disorder, had suffered a workplace injury within the meaning of the Act respecting industrial accidents and occupational diseases.
The Facts
The employee was a data analyst at a video game company. In March 2022, her employer organized a celebration to mark the launch of a new game and highlight a colleague’s departure. The event was fully organized by the company, who booked a reception hall in a hotel and invited its employees as well as external consultants who had worked on the project. Each participant was provided with a cocktail at the beginning of the evening and five tickets which could each be redeemed for a drink.
The atmosphere was festive and some attendees drank heavily. Towards the end of the evening, the company’s communications director, who was in charge of handing out drink tickets, was herself intoxicated and began handing out unused tickets to participants who were still present.
At that point, the employee was visibly intoxicated and expressed concern to her colleagues about her capacity to return home safely. A male consultant who had worked on the launch and whom she barely knew offered to accompany her back to her place. Once at the employee’s home, the consultant sexually assaulted her. In the days that followed, the employee reported the incident to her employer, who quickly terminated the consultant’s contract.
The employee subsequently filed a complaint with the ALT against her employer for psychological harassment. At the hearing, the company did not dispute that the employee had been sexually assaulted. However, it argued that the incident had occurred in the personal sphere, and that the employer was therefore not responsible. In the alternative, it claimed that it had taken reasonable steps to prevent such an incident. The Tribunal rejected both arguments and upheld the employee’s complaint. It also granted the employee’s request for a declaration that she had suffered a workplace injury.
The (Porous) Boundary Between the Work Environment and the Personal Sphere
First, the Tribunal concluded without great difficulty that the sexual assault constituted vexatious behaviour which had caused the employee to suffer lasting and harmful effects, therefore meeting the definition of psychological harassment under section 81.18 of the Act respecting labour standards (ALS).
The key issue was rather whether the employer had fulfilled its duty to take reasonable action to prevent the incident. Although this duty is limited to incidents occurring within the work environment, the Tribunal held that the ALS must be interpreted broadly. Therefore, for an incident to fall within the scope of the work environment, there must be a sufficient work-related context or purpose to the event, as well as a continuum linking the harassment incident to the work environment. The Tribunal emphasized that a strict focus on physical location or working hours is not an appropriate basis for determining whether or not a given event falls within the work environment.
In this case, the social event was organized by the employer and explicitly aimed at improving the workplace atmosphere by celebrating the launch of a product. The risk of excessive alcohol consumption was foreseeable. Had it not been for the work party, the employee would never have found herself alone at home with her assaulter in such a vulnerable state. According to the Tribunal, there was therefore no rupture in the continuum linking the professional activity to the harassment incident. As such, the employer was bound by a duty to take reasonable action to prevent this occurrence.
The Employer’s Failure to Manage Risk Factors
The evidence showed that the drink ticket distribution system was poorly controlled and managed by an intoxicated manager. No one was designated to ensure that party attendees were able to safely return home at the end of the event or to help those who were intoxicated. The Tribunal therefore found that the employer had not only failed to control alcohol consumption but also failed to supervise the participants’ safe departure and provide concrete support for vulnerable individuals.
Moreover, the employer had adopted a harassment prevention policy, but it had not shared this policy with external consultants despite the fact that they regularly attended work-related events. As such, the Tribunal found that the employer had failed to take reasonable action to prevent the assault.
Considerations for Employers
This decision reflects a broader trend in recent case law toward stricter expectations for employers with respect to harassment prevention. While the outer limits of the duty to prevent harassment remain uncertain, it is clear that the days when an office party could be organized without seriously considering risk mitigation are over. In light of this, Employers should henceforth consider adopting the following the practices:
- Distributing harassment prevention policies to all consultants or third parties which are likely to attend work events.
- Closely managing the use of drink tickets when alcohol is served, limiting consumption and controlling distribution.
- Designating sober supervisors to oversee the event and ensure safe departures.
- Making breathalyzer tests available for participants.
- Following up on taxi or ride-share arrangements to ensure everyone gets home safely.
- Any intoxicated or vulnerable individual should be cared for seriously. Depending on the circumstances, appropriate measures should be taken to guarantee their safe return home.
