Case card

Friss v Provincial Health Services Authority and another (No. 2), 2026 BCHRT 199

The BC Human Rights Tribunal refused to reopen its dismissal of a vaccine related religious discrimination complaint because disagreement with the ruling wasn't a reconsideration ground.

Source reviewed · Court holding

Held. The BC Human Rights Tribunal refused to reopen its dismissal of a vaccine related religious discrimination complaint because disagreement with the ruling wasn't a reconsideration ground.

The BC Human Rights Tribunal denied a former health authority worker's application to reconsider the dismissal of his employment discrimination complaint. The complaint arose from his refusal to follow workplace vaccination orders on religious grounds. In September 2026, the Tribunal refused to reopen the complaint merely because the worker disagreed with the July dismissal.

The Tribunal explained that reconsideration is reserved for narrow situations such as unresolved issues or procedural unfairness. It found no such defect in the earlier decision. This ruling concerns the finality of tribunal decisions, not a new assessment of whether vaccination requirements complied with human rights law.

Original tribunal reasons

Was this useful?
Follow this in Binder.

Keep the subject attached to your Binder interests so future Canadian developments can find their way back to you.

Binder · The business behind your business

Reading about it is one thing. Managing your own workplace issue is another.

An employment concern can involve conversations, records, accommodations, contracts and decisions. Keep the circumstances together before the next decision. Binder organizes what you know and helps you recognize what still needs attention.

Read the source ↗