Case snapshot
At a glance
- Case
- Can a Late Human Rights Complaint Survive in Ontario?
- Court / Tribunal
- Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
- Date
- July 2, 2026
- Area of law
- Litigation Law
- Key issue
- Whether a human rights complaint filed outside the one-year limitation period should be allowed to proceed on the basis that the delay was incurred in good faith and no substantial prejudice would result.
- Outcome
- The Tribunal ruled on whether the late-filed application met the statutory test, determining whether the delay was in good faith and whether allowing it to proceed would cause substantial prejudice to the respondent.
- Why it matters
- Ontario workers who miss the one-year deadline to file a human rights complaint need to understand exactly what it takes to have a late application accepted — or they risk losing their right to a hearing entirely.
Legal principle
The rule from this case
Under the Ontario Human Rights Code, an application must generally be filed within one year of the last incident of discrimination. However, the Tribunal has discretion to extend that deadline if two conditions are met: the delay was incurred in good faith, and allowing the application to proceed would not cause substantial prejudice to the other party. Good faith is not simply about having a reason for the delay. The applicant must show they acted honestly and reasonably in the circumstances — for example, by not sitting on their rights once they understood what had happened to them. The Tribunal weighs the explanation for the delay against any real harm the respondent would suffer from having to respond to older allegations.
Important limits
What this does not mean
This decision does not mean that any explanation for a late filing will be accepted. The Tribunal applies a genuine two-part test, and meeting only one branch — for instance, showing good faith but failing to address prejudice — is not enough. Applicants cannot simply say they were unaware of the deadline and expect the Tribunal to wave them through. It also does not mean the one-year limitation period is flexible in every case. Missing the deadline is a serious procedural problem. Workers who believe they have experienced discrimination should seek legal advice as quickly as possible after an incident, rather than assuming the Tribunal will grant an extension.
What Is the Deadline to File a Human Rights Complaint in Ontario?
In Ontario, you generally have one year from the date of the last discriminatory act to file an application with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO). That deadline is set out in the Ontario Human Rights Code and is taken seriously. Missing it does not automatically end your case, but it does create a significant legal hurdle you must clear before the Tribunal will hear your complaint on the merits.
In Ayee v. Paragon Security, 2026 HRTO 1026 (CanLII), the Tribunal was asked to decide whether a complaint filed outside that one-year window should be allowed to proceed — a question that comes up more often than many workers realize.
What Happens If You Miss the One-Year Limitation Period?
Missing the deadline means the respondent can raise a preliminary objection, and the Tribunal must then decide whether to exercise its discretion to extend time. The Tribunal does not simply dismiss late applications automatically. Instead, it applies a two-part legal test before deciding whether the application can move forward.
The two questions the Tribunal asks are: Was the delay incurred in good faith? And would allowing the application to proceed cause substantial prejudice to the other party? Both branches of the test matter. Satisfying only one is not enough.
What Does ‘Good Faith’ Mean at the HRTO?
Good faith, in this context, means the applicant acted honestly and reasonably after the incident occurred. It is not enough to simply say you did not know about the deadline — the Tribunal looks at the full picture of what you did (or did not do) once you understood that something discriminatory may have happened to you.
Factors that can support a finding of good faith include seeking legal advice promptly, taking steps to resolve the matter informally, or facing circumstances that genuinely prevented earlier filing. Sitting on your rights without a reasonable explanation tends to weigh against good faith, even if the applicant had no bad intentions.
What Is ‘Substantial Prejudice’ and Why Does It Matter?
Substantial prejudice refers to real harm the respondent would suffer if the late application were allowed to proceed. This is not just inconvenience or the general burden of defending a complaint. The respondent must show something more concrete — for example, that key witnesses are no longer available, that records have been destroyed in the ordinary course of business, or that the passage of time has genuinely compromised their ability to mount a defence.
If the respondent cannot point to real, tangible harm caused by the delay, that branch of the test is less likely to block the application from proceeding. Courts and tribunals across Ontario have consistently held that prejudice must be more than theoretical.
Does the Nature of the Discrimination Allegation Affect the Analysis?
The type of discrimination alleged — whether it involves race, disability, sex, or another protected ground under the Code — does not change the limitation period or the two-part test. However, the nature of the alleged conduct can sometimes be relevant to the good faith analysis. For instance, if the discriminatory behaviour was ongoing or escalating, it may affect when the clock started running in the first place.
In some cases, what looks like a single incident is actually part of a continuing pattern. If the last act in that pattern falls within the one-year window, the entire complaint may be timely without needing an extension at all. This is a nuance worth exploring with a lawyer before concluding that your application is necessarily late.
Practical Takeaways for Employees and Complainants
- Act quickly after an incident. The one-year clock starts from the last discriminatory act. Do not wait to see how things unfold at work before deciding whether to file.
- Document everything. Keep records of dates, incidents, witnesses, and any communications related to the alleged discrimination. This helps both your substantive case and any argument about when the limitation period began.
- Get legal advice early. If you think you may have missed the deadline, do not assume your case is over. A lawyer can assess whether the delay was in good faith and whether the respondent can demonstrate real prejudice.
- Do not rely on informal resolution efforts as an excuse for delay. While attempting to resolve a dispute internally can sometimes support a good faith argument, it is not a guaranteed extension of your filing deadline.
- Understand that both branches of the test must be met. Even if your delay was entirely innocent, the Tribunal will still consider whether the respondent is prejudiced. Both questions need to be addressed.
If you are dealing with a workplace discrimination issue in the Greater Toronto Area or Hamilton region, our Ontario litigation lawyers can help you assess your options and timelines before it is too late.
Workers in the Mississauga and Brampton areas facing similar issues can also find local support through our Mississauga litigation team and Brampton litigation team, who are familiar with HRTO proceedings and workplace rights claims across the region.
This article is automated commentary on a public court decision and is for general information only — not legal advice. Decisions rely on facts unique to each case. If you are affected by a similar issue, contact a lawyer for advice specific to your situation.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
You generally have one year from the date of the last discriminatory act to file an application with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario. Missing this deadline does not automatically end your case, but you will need to satisfy a two-part test to have a late application accepted.
Yes, the Tribunal has discretion to allow a late application if the delay was incurred in good faith and the respondent would not suffer substantial prejudice as a result. Both conditions must be satisfied — meeting only one is not sufficient.
The Code prohibits discrimination based on protected grounds such as race, disability, sex, age, religion, and several others, in areas including employment, housing, and services. If you believe you were treated unfairly because of one of these characteristics, you may have grounds for an HRTO application.