The Pendulum is Swinging: Another Award of Costs by the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal

Human rights complaints are an increasingly common issue for employers in Alberta. However, in spite of the growing frequency of complaints filed, and the increasing number of decisions released each year, there is still a very limited number of instances where costs are awarded to the successful party by the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal (the “Tribunal”).

While section 32(2) of the Alberta Human Rights Act (the “Act”) grants the Tribunal the discretion to award costs, the Tribunal has historically used that discretion sparingly. The Tribunal’s historical reluctance to use its discretion is informed, in part, by public policy considerations; specifically, not wanting the risk of a potential adverse costs award to discourage potential complainants from bringing forward legitimate complaints. Although these public policy considerations remain, we are now seeing the Tribunal be less reluctant to use its discretion.

One such example is the recently released decision of Shodunke v Paladin Security Group Ltd., 2025 AHRC 2 (“Shodunke”). In Shodunke, the respondent-employer (“Paladin”) terminated the complainant’s employment during his probationary period. In response, the complainant took the position that his termination was discriminatory and filed a human rights complaint.

Following the dismissal of the complaint, Paladin brought an application for costs against the complainant for “costs of $20,000 or more […] for frivolous, vexatious and improper conduct throughout the hearing process and in improperly recording the hearing.” Paladin was successful in its costs application and of note, the Tribunal awarded it $25,000 in costs.

In rendering the costs award, the Tribunal affirmed that “An award of costs against a [party] is only appropriate in circumstances where the [party] has engaged in conduct that was dishonest or significantly prejudicial to a party or the integrity of the process [and that] [f]or significant costs to be awarded at the conclusion of a proceeding, a party needs to have engaged in conduct that essentially amounts to an abuse of process, including: a, dishonest conduct in the proceedings; b, conduct that is significantly prejudicial to another party; or c, conduct that is significantly prejudicial to the integrity of the process.”

To this end, the Tribunal concluded that the complainant had engaged in various forms of misconduct sufficient to justify a large costs award. First, the complainant had delayed the proceedings by failing to disclose relevant and material evidence and repeatedly interrupting the proceedings with argument. Second, the complainant also tried to mislead the Tribunal by making intentional misstatements of evidence. Third, the complainant also demonstrated a total disregard for the Tribunal’s authority and process by repeatedly ignoring deadlines and submissions criteria, attempting to introduce new evidence despite being directed not to, submitting irrelevant evidence and authorities, and making baseless accusations against the respondent’s counsel and the Tribunal, respectively, regarding ethics and bias, for the purpose of obstructing the Tribunal’s process. As a result, the Tribunal exercised its discretion.

While Shodunke does not change the law with respect to when costs will be awarded by the Tribunal, it provides greater context (and authority) with respect to what types of misconduct will encourage the Tribunal to exercise its discretion to award costs under section 32 of the Act. In this regard, although cost awards will still not be attainable in most human rights complaints in Alberta, this decision is a good reminder to employers that where a complainant engages in misconduct, or abuse of process, there may be a legitimate opportunity to recoup some legal expenses in respect of the complaint through a costs award.

Note: McLennan Ross represented the respondent in this case.

If you have questions about the topic discussed above, or any other employment matters, please connect with our Labour and Employment team.