It is well established that medical evidence is not mandatory to prove the degree of emotional trauma suffered by the applicant in a claim for compensatory damages. This is so before the tribunal and also at common law.

It is well-founded that while corroborative evidence is certainly helpful, it is not a pre-condition to prove an allegation of sexual harassment ¹

Nonetheless such evidence will be preferred and will likely allow for a more generous damage assessment, but it is not mandatory to prove the degree of emotional trauma suffered by the applicant.

As noted by the Supreme Court in the decision stating that medical evidence was not a prerequisite in a claim for psychiatric injuries, there is a risk that ad hoc evidence may not win the day: [S.C.C. Saadati v Moorhead [/efn_note]

Nor should any of this be taken as suggesting that expert evidence cannot assist in determining whether or not a mental injury has been shown. In assessing whether the claimant has succeeded, it will often be important to consider, for example, how seriously the claimant’s cognitive functions and participation in daily activities were impaired, the length of such impairment and the nature and effect of any treatment (Mulheron, at p. 109). To the extent that claimants do not adduce relevant expert evidence to assist triers of fact in applying these and any other relevant considerations, they run a risk of being found to have fallen short.

One would expect that in cases alleging that the applicant was unable to work because of the trauma suffered by the adverse conduct, that medical evidence would be critical to the success of such a claim.