A complainant must establish the following three elements in a retaliation complaint: 1. The respondent was aware that the complainant made or might make a complaint, gave evidence or might give evidence in a complaint, or otherwise assisted or might assist in a complaint. 2. The respondent engaged in or threatened to engage in the conduct described in s. 43. 3. There is a sufficient connection between the impugned conduct and the previous complaint. This connection may be established by proving that the respondent intended to retaliate, or may be inferred where the respondent can reasonably have been perceived to have engaged in that conduct in retaliation, with the element of reasonable perception being assessed from the point of view of a reasonable complainant, apprised of the facts, at the time of the impugned conduct. (Gichuru v. Pallai, 2018 BCCA 78 [Gichuru] at para. 58)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.