The applicant is not suggesting that there was any explicit age discrimination. There is no suggestion, such as in Reiss v. CCH Canadian Limited, 2013 HRTO 764 (“Reiss”) at paras. 83-85, that the respondent had indicated it was looking for someone “more junior”, or some similar euphemism for age. Rather, the applicant’s argument is that the only explanation for the respondent hiring someone with less experience is that they did not want him because of his age.
"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.