Alberta tribunal not willing to delay vaccine complaints despite 80 parallel lawsuits
The Alberta Human Rights Tribunal has rejected Canadian Natural Resources Limited's bid to delay six consolidated human rights complaints filed by employees terminated under the company's 2021 COVID-19 vaccination policy.
In an interim decision dated Oct. 8, 2025, tribunal member Karen Scott dismissed CNRL's application to stay proceedings pending roughly 80 parallel wrongful dismissal claims in civil court, ruling that the balance of convenience "weighs heavily against" granting the stay.
The complaints involve five employees—Regina Goman, Thomas Elliott, Rick Rosychuk, Lorne Tennant, and Jodi Brown—who allege discrimination based on religious beliefs that prevented them from complying with the policy, plus Brian Relland, who alleges discrimination based on mental and physical disability.
All six were terminated following the implementation of CNRL's vaccination requirement.
Employer's bid to pause proceedings falls flat
CNRL argued that allowing the human rights complaints to proceed while civil claims were ongoing would lead to duplication of proceedings, waste resources, and potentially disrupt a test case process where one civil claim will be tried first to bind the remaining 80 cases.
Scott was unconvinced: "The Tribunal is not convinced that the potential for duplication of efforts is unavoidable in this case, nor that any such duplication or interplay between the two proceedings would result in irreparable harm to CNRL."
The tribunal found that the civil claims focus on whether CNRL's policy breached employment contracts, while the human rights complaints examine whether religious beliefs or disabilities were factors in terminations and whether CNRL failed to accommodate to the point of undue hardship. Scott noted that either forum could apply legal principles to adjust proceedings based on findings made in the other, and that courts could adjust remedies to account for awards already granted by the tribunal.
Four-year delay would erode evidence quality
Scott emphasized the significant delay that would result from staying the human rights complaints. The civil test case has no trial date set, with questioning scheduled only for late November 2025—four years after the policy's implementation.
"Delay is commonly associated with the erosion of memories and the deterioration of the quality of the evidence available to the Tribunal," Scott wrote. "Further delays in the hearing of the Complaints / Relland Complaint will irreparably harm all parties' ability to present their cases."
The tribunal rejected CNRL's assertion that the court was the "preferable forum" due to case complexity, stating that granting a stay would undermine the tribunal's statutory mandate. "The Tribunal routinely hears and decides complex matters involving multiple parties and assessments of credibility, and has developed fair, flexible procedures for doing so," Scott stated.
Six cases, one hearing
While rejecting CNRL's stay application, Scott granted the request to consolidate all six complaints for a single hearing. She found common issues of fact and law, as all complaints involve the same policy implemented by the same employer at the same time.
The consolidation will reduce the need for repetition of evidence, particularly from CNRL's expert witnesses on vaccine efficacy and lay witnesses on policy development and implementation. Scott noted that the same legal counsel represents five of the six complainants, minimizing potential prejudice from a longer combined hearing.
"Viewing the matter as a whole, the Tribunal finds that consolidating the Complaints / Relland Complaint is appropriate," Scott concluded. "It will reduce the resources required to hear the Complaints / Relland Complaint overall and avoid contradictory or inconsistent results while still allowing each complainant's individual circumstances to be considered."
