Human rights tribunal dismisses claim of discrimination due to applicant's filing delay
April 07, 2025
An applicant to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (Tribunal) has had her claim regarding an inadequate pension buy-back dismissed after the Tribunal ruled that she had taken too long to file her application.
According to the decision, the applicant’s employment status with the City of Ottawa changed at various times in the 1990s and early 2000s to account for the leaves and alternate work arrangements she utilized while raising her children. Those adjustments had reduced her total pensionable service in the pension plan, which she later sought to purchase.
Although she took advantage of a pension buy-back offer in 2009, the scheme only credited her an additional 18 months of pensionable service, rather than the 41 months she believed she would be credited.
The applicant brought the complaint against both the plan administrator and her employer. Specifically, she claimed that she had been discriminated against as a woman and mother as a result of her inability to buy back the full amount of the pensionable service she lost while raising her children.
The Tribunal first considered whether the applicant had brought the complaint within the one-year limitation period applicable to her claim. The applicant argued that she had not been aware of her human rights claim until 2023, when she learned of a Supreme Court of Canada decision, Fraser v. Canada (Attorney General), that she believed had implications for her own circumstances. She says that upon learning of this decision, she acted diligently to pursue her claim of discrimination.
However, the Tribunal found that the applicant’s claims of recent discovery were “not plausible”, observing that she would have discovered her claim back in 2009 when she initially accepted the buy-back offer. She had at that time received a letter explaining the scope of the buy-back, which had indicated that her entitlement was less than she had expected.
The Tribunal then ruled that the applicant had not demonstrated a good faith reason for her filing delay. Despite knowing of the circumstances giving rise to her claim as early as 2009, she had not acted with “all diligence” in pursuing her rights. As a result, the application was dismissed.
Click on more information below to learn more:
