A recent decision from the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (the “Tribunal”) signals a significant shift in how damages are calculated in human rights claims. In McConnell v. Hibbert, 2026 HRTO 579, the Tribunal demonstrated that inflation is now a formal factor that can push damages awards higher, even when the misconduct falls within established historical categories. This decision has broad implications for how employers must assess their potential liability in workplace disputes.
In McConnell, the applicant was an employee who alleged discrimination and harassment on the basis of sex. The application was filed against both the respondent employer and an individual respondent who was an executive of the management company.
The applicant alleged a distressing physical encounter where the individual respondent rubbed against him in a sexual manner and placed a hand on his back and lower abdomen. The respondent then moved his hands toward the applicant’s neck and began to choke him while standing behind him before walking away. While the employer respondent settled with the applicant prior to the hearing, the applicant continued the legal proceeding against the individual, who did not participate in the process.
The Law
The case was decided based on several key principles under the Ontario Human Rights Code. The Tribunal found that sexual harassment had occurred because the respondent exercised employment-related authority over the applicant, the incident took place in the workplace while the applicant was performing her duties, and the conduct was sexual in nature. The Tribunal also concluded that there was no consent, as the parties did not know each other at the time of the incident and there was therefore no basis to view the conduct as welcome. Finally, in determining damages, the Tribunal applied the standard of injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect, which is the primary measure used to assess compensation for human rights violations.
The Tribunal’s Decision
To determine the appropriate amount of damages, the Tribunal reviewed comparable decisions from 2018 to 2024 involving sexual harassment and physical assault, which established a range of awards between $42,500 and $200,000. The Tribunal ultimately awarded the applicant $75,000 for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect. While the case involved a single incident and no prior verbal harassment, which would typically place it on the less serious end of the spectrum, an aggravating factor was the fact that the incident occurred before the applicant even knew who the individual respondent was. The Tribunal also placed significant weight on inflation as a factor in the assessment of damages, recognizing that it is now 2026 and that an award of a given dollar amount today does not carry the same value as an identical award made in prior years. . As a result, the Tribunal found that this justified a higher award.
Takeaways
This decision signals that traditional ranges for human rights damages are likely to increase over time due to inflation. Employers and other workplace parties must now consider the impact of inflation when assessing the potential cost of human rights claims, as higher awards may be justified even where the underlying conduct is comparable to past cases where lower damages were awarded. The Tribunal’s reasoning is also likely to extend beyond sexual harassment cases to other human rights violations, including discrimination, failures to investigate harassment and reprisals. Although the Tribunal did not establish a specific formula for adjusting awards based on inflation, it made it clear that inflation is a relevant consideration and may result in future awards falling into higher compensation ranges than those seen in previous years. For employers, to ensure your business is compliant with human rights laws, contact JPAK Employment Lawyers.
For employees, if you have concerns about the protection and enforcement of your rights under human rights laws in the workplace, schedule a consultation with one of our lawyers.
