NC-227 - Harassment

The Appellant filed a harassment complaint (Complaint) against the Alleged Harasser for incidents that occurred between December 1, 2013 and to August 12, 2015. While the Complaint was filed four days after the expiry of the one-year statutory time limit to do so, an investigation was mandated to gather additional information. Following the harassment investigation, the Respondent found that the Complaint was not established. The Decision was served to the Appellant on September 1, 2017. The Appellant filed his appeal on September 29, 2017, 14 days after the time limit of 14 days to do so. 

Regarding the timeliness of the Complaint, the ERC found that the Respondent implicitly granted an extension of time by mandating an investigation into the Complaint and addressing its merits.

Regarding the timeliness of the Appeal, the ERC found that no extension of the time limit should be granted.  

In assessing whether a retroactive extension of the limitation period was warranted, the ERC considered the four-factor test set out in (Attorney General) v. Pentney, 2008 FC 96. The ERC found that the Appellant had not demonstrated a continuing intention to appeal the Decision and that he had not provided a reasonable explanation for submitting his appeal 14 days after the statutory time limit. As for the remaining factors, the ERC found that the Appellant presented an arguable case and that there was no indication of any prejudice to the Respondent arising from the delay incurred by the Appellant before initiating his appeal.

Finally, the ERC found that a balancing of these factors, better supports the conclusion that an extension of time is not warranted in the circumstances and would not serve the interest of justice.

The ERC recommends that the appeal be dismissed.