New changes to HRTO Rules of Procedure & Practice Directions – Les nouveaux changements des règles de procédure et directives de pratique The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) announced updates to its Rules of Procedure, Practice Directions, Forms and operational processes coming into effect as of August 17, 2026. Please see our home page or Human Rights Law Updates section for details. --- Le Tribunal des droits de la personne de l’Ontario (TDPO) a annoncé des mises à jour à ses Règles de procédure, ses directives de pratique, ses formulaires et ses processus opérationnels. Les mises à jour entrent en vigueur le 17 août 2026. Pour plus d'informations, veuillez consulter notre page d'accueil ou notre section « Mises à jour de la loi ».

HRLSC Logo Home
Accessibility
Popular Topics:
[contact-form-7 id="1123" title="RFP Form"]

News about sexual-harassment

HRTO finds HRLSC client experienced sexual harassment and solicitation in the workplace

The HRTO recently issued a successful decision for an applicant that the HRLSC represented at hearing: Aloy-Sadakane v. Data & Scientific Inc., 2024 HRTO 770. The applicant alleged that the Executive Vice-President of her former employer, who was named as a personal respondent in her application, repeatedly hugged and touched her inappropriately and made sexualised comments towards her. He would also ask her questions about her sexuality and asked her if she was a “homosexual”.

The personal respondent’s conduct caused the applicant such psychological distress that she went on a medical leave and ultimately resigned from her employment, after only two months on the job. She testified that she developed anxiety and insomnia and began to experience panic attacks, requiring her to receive treatment from a psychiatrist.

The HRTO found that the personal respondent had harassed the applicant on the basis of sex and sexual orientation and made sexual advances towards her, all of which violated the applicant’s rights under the Code. The applicant was awarded $50,000 in general damages to compensate for the injury to her dignity caused by the Code violations, as well as damages meant to compensate for her lost wages and the medical expenses she incurred receiving psychological therapy. The personal respondent was also ordered to undergo training on sexual harassment in the workplace while the employer was required to develop employee materials on sexual harassment.

HRLSC Client Wins Sexual Harassment Claim Against Former Employer

The HRLSC recently represented an applicant before the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) in her fight to address sexual harassment that she was subjected to by her employer. The respondent, 53-year-old Mark Langford, was a long-time family friend of the applicant, Allyson Kreps, who was only 20 years old when she was hired to work for the respondent’s maintenance company.

Image of a gravel road through a forrest. In Kreps v. AHMIC Maintenance & Storage Ltd., the employer's inappropriate culminated in a trip to the respondent’s remote trap camp, which was unreachable by cell phone.

The applicant alleged in her application to the HRTO that the respondent regularly made inappropriate and suggestive comments to her and used her position of employment with his company to repeatedly create opportunities to be alone with her. His behaviour culminated in a trip to the respondent’s remote trap camp, which was unreachable by cell phone. While at the trap camp, the applicant alleged the respondent sexually solicited and assaulted her. These events provoked the applicant to have a panic attack. Given the remoteness of the site and the fact that the respondent had driven her there, the applicant was unable to leave the site or call for help.

In Kreps v. AHMIC Maintenance & Storage Ltd., 2024 HRTO 214, the HRTO found that the applicant had faced discrimination on the basis of sex, including sexual harassment in her workplace. In its decision, the HRTO noted that “the respondent’s conduct is indicative of not appreciating his obligations under the Code with respect to sexual harassment.”

In its remedies, the HRTO took into account “the fact that the most heinous incident occurred while the applicant was alone with the respondent in an isolated area is a serious aggravating factor.”

The Tribunal ordered the respondent to:

  • pay over $39,000 in damages including compensation, loss of income and the costs of counseling for the applicant; and
  • complete the Ontario Human Rights Commission training modules on sexual harassment at work: 1) OHRC and HRPA Webinar on Preventing Sexual Harassment at Work and 2) Preventing Sexual Harassment at Work: An Overview.