The British Columbia Court of Appeal has upheld a former stewardess’s class action lawsuit against WestJet Airlines, overturning the decision of a judge from the British Columbia Supreme Court, who rejected her application.
Former WestJet flight attendant Mandalena Lewis filed a lawsuit against WestJet in 2016, alleging that the airline violated its contract by failing to create a safe working environment for female flight attendants.
Lewis also filed a separate lawsuit against the company, claiming that it did not take appropriate action after it reported that it had been sexually assaulted by a pilot while landing in Hawaii. She claims that the company chose to protect the pilot and fired her.
The court overturned the initial dismissal
Her initial offer to certify the class action failed when the court ruled that she had failed to prove that this type of claim was the most effective and fair course of action to resolve her claims.
“I conclude that there are other reasonably available means for class members to achieve substantive and procedural justice that are more practical and effective than class proceedings,” said British Columbia Supreme Court Justice Karen Horsman. her decision.
Horsman found that a Canadian human rights tribunal or collective bargaining would be a more effective remedy.
However, the judge of the Court of Appeal, Peter Voight, disagreed, finding that the lower court judge had erred in law in assessing the criteria for a class action and determining whether he met the legal grounds as a “preferential procedure”.
Mandalena Lewis, left, worked for WestJet. She claims that the airline did not take appropriate action after it reported sexual violence by a pilot while landing in Hawaii. (Mandalena Luis / Facebook)
Voith found that the other judge misinterpreted Lewis’s claim as discrimination in the workplace when she suggested a class action lawsuit be more appropriate for the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.
“In a human rights complaint, only those members of the class who have actually suffered discrimination, in the form of harassment or otherwise, can potentially seek monetary compensation,” Voith writes.
But since the class action lawsuit was not an allegation of harassment but a breach of contract, Voith determined that this was in fact the preferential procedure.
This is an important distinction, said Louis Carrie Brooks’ lawyer.
“The claim does not concern compensation for harassment. That’s key, “she said.
“I think what’s really important in this case, and why it’s so important, is that it doesn’t require women to be harassed in order to enforce the contractual rights they have in the workplace without harassment.”
For Lewis, she admits that she feels as if she is in a state of shock after being certified for group action.
“I’m really excited,” she said. “I can’t believe it because it’s been so long … I just feel so happy.”
Lewis and Brooks will now have a chance to prove their class actions in court.
Add Comment