Mediation and Arbitration - Access to Justice
Ms. Chotalia has significant experience in both Mediation and Arbitration. As part of the Access to Justice initiatives at the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, of which she was Former Chairperson, Ms. Chotalia developed Customized Procedures to assist parties to "be heard" without incurring significant legal costs. This is particularly important given that the Tribunal does not have the jurisdiction to award successful complainants legal costs.
In fact, Ms. Chotalia was counsel in the last decision before the Tribunal wherein it awarded a successful complainant solicitor client costs: Gilmar v. Alexis Nakota Sioux Nation Board of Education, 2009 CHRT 34 Pregnancy discrimination. The Federal Court of Appeal ruled in September 2009 in "Mowat" that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to award costs to successful complainant. This decision was upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada in late 2011: Canada (Canadian Human Rights Commission) v. Canada (Attorney General), 2011 SCC 53, [2011] S.C.R. 471 Mowat.)
Ms. Mowat filed a human rights complaint alleging discrimination on the ground of sex, contrary to the provisions of the Canadian Human Rights Act. The Tribunal ruled that the sexual harassment complaint was substantiated and awarded Ms. Mowat damages for pain and suffering in the amount of $4,000 plus interest. Ms. Mowat also sought compensation for legal expenses. The Tribunal found that it had jurisdiction to award legal costs and awarded Ms. Mowat the amount of $47,000 for legal costs with interest from the date of the decision to the date of payment of the award. The inability for successful complainants to receive compensation for their legal fees restricts access to justice. See Touchstones The CBA Standing Committee on Equality Newsletter, June 2011 regarding the same in its article: "Mowat v. Canada – The difference costs make to access to justice and the human rights culture in Canada."
Other steps Ms. Chotalia took to further Access to Justice, include her implementation of Process Mediation, to narrow issues, for fair and efficient hearings. See the Enhanced Complaint Resolution Process.
In fact, Ms. Chotalia was counsel in the last decision before the Tribunal wherein it awarded a successful complainant solicitor client costs: Gilmar v. Alexis Nakota Sioux Nation Board of Education, 2009 CHRT 34 Pregnancy discrimination. The Federal Court of Appeal ruled in September 2009 in "Mowat" that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to award costs to successful complainant. This decision was upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada in late 2011: Canada (Canadian Human Rights Commission) v. Canada (Attorney General), 2011 SCC 53, [2011] S.C.R. 471 Mowat.)
Ms. Mowat filed a human rights complaint alleging discrimination on the ground of sex, contrary to the provisions of the Canadian Human Rights Act. The Tribunal ruled that the sexual harassment complaint was substantiated and awarded Ms. Mowat damages for pain and suffering in the amount of $4,000 plus interest. Ms. Mowat also sought compensation for legal expenses. The Tribunal found that it had jurisdiction to award legal costs and awarded Ms. Mowat the amount of $47,000 for legal costs with interest from the date of the decision to the date of payment of the award. The inability for successful complainants to receive compensation for their legal fees restricts access to justice. See Touchstones The CBA Standing Committee on Equality Newsletter, June 2011 regarding the same in its article: "Mowat v. Canada – The difference costs make to access to justice and the human rights culture in Canada."
Other steps Ms. Chotalia took to further Access to Justice, include her implementation of Process Mediation, to narrow issues, for fair and efficient hearings. See the Enhanced Complaint Resolution Process.