A young woman's four-year-old sexual harassment case trudged on in Yukon Supreme Court on Thursday.

Devon Hanson's lawyers argued she deserved financial damages from a Whitehorse man found guilty by a human rights tribunal of sexually harassing the then-18-year-old in 2010.

Hanson's cross-appeal demanded $15,000 from her former boss and basketball coach, Mark Hureau, as well as liability by the Intersport franchise he once owned.

The submissions yesterday followed an appeal Wednesday by Hureau, 47, of a ruling by the Yukon Human Rights Board of Adjudication that text messages and emails he sent Hanson in March 2010 constituted sexual harassment.

Hureau maintains the electronic messages did not amount to such.

The board's 2012 decision pegged the level of harassment at the "most mild end of the spectrum.”

Hureau is appealing the board's finding and Hanson is arguing there should have been an award for emotional and psychological damages.

Court proceedings were scheduled to continue this afternoon.

Hanson's lawyer Rick Buchan sought to establish the ongoing injuries to her "feelings, dignity and self-respect,” which warrant at least some compensation, he argued.

Hanson received three months' salary and some legal costs as a result of the board's ruling, but no money for damages.

Buchan pointed to Hanson's own statements to the board from 2012 as evidence of trauma.

"At first it was difficult. I was still kind of in shock about what happened,” she said, by then a political science student at St. Francis Xavier University.

"It's affected my sleep a lot.... I find myself sleeping through the day, missing classes and labs....”

Justice Ron Veale asked whether her anxiety was related to the incident or the subsequent board hearing.

"There's no question court is stressful,” Veale said. "But that's not normally part of the process of damage recovery.”

"This is a case where it's difficult to separate the incident from everything that happened after,” Buchan replied.

He noted Hanson had seen counsellors in the wake of the events of March 2010.

Buchan underscored the broader significance of legal situations like Hanson's.

"It's important to encourage others to stand up, girls and women ... to ensure that the public value of confronting sexual discrimination is not swept under the rug,” he said.

"Otherwise it will continue to hide in the shadows ... and be tolerated.”

Buchan speculated on what may have been going through Hanson's mind before she went to the board.

"‘Would they not say that I invited it myself ... what if I get fired?' These are the kinds of dilemmas that women can face when confronted with sexual harassment, particularly when the perpetrator is in a position of power, as in this case,” Buchan said.

He said there was a violation of trust implicit in the messages sent by Hureau — Hanson's basketball coach since she was "14 or 15” — and the lasting toll that could take on an young person "on the threshold of womanhood.”

Hanson's father Michael was in the courtroom for much of the proceedings.

"It's been hard on all of us, especially my daughter,” he told the Star Wednesday.

"I'm pretty emotional right now. It's been a huge strain.”

He admitted he had become conflicted about "going this route,” undertaking legal costs and drawing out over four years the experiences of four weeks instead of dropping a matter verging on the merely inappropriate, as the board noted.

"She's basically been shunned by the kids who she played basketball with....It's been a hard piece,” he said.

Colleen Harrington, a lawyer for the Yukon Human Rights Commission, said there was a contradiction in the board acknowledging that Hanson suffered some injury but not awarding her damages.

She said the board justified this in part because the harassment was on the low "end of the spectrum” and Hureau suffered as well: "Poor Mr. Hanson, he's gone through so much, we'll deny Devon the damages that are appropriate,” she said in mimicry.

The judge questioned Harrington's reasoning: "It seems to me that once they found it was the low end, they followed it through.”

"But it seems contradictory,” Harrington replied. "They say sexual harassment of any kind is serious ... so sound legal principles were absolutely vacant from the board's decision.”

An argument was also put forward that Intersport, not just Hureau — who was manager and sole shareholder at the time — should be held liable for harassment.

One lawyer told the court the board erred in making "prior notification” by Hanson a prerequisite for employer liability.

She quit her job in late March 2010, before the company found out about her discomfort or the messages that prompted it.

The lawyers pointed out the apparent inconsistency between the Canada Human Rights Act and the Yukon Human Rights Act regarding the liability of an employer — in this case Intersport, a sporting goods store.

A Supreme Court of Canada lawsuit from 1987 states that "only an employer can remedy undesirable effects and only an employer can provide the most important remedy — a healthy work environment.

"The central purpose of a human rights act is remedial — to eradicate anti-social conditions without regard to the motives or intention of those who cause them,” according to the decision rendered by the highest court.

The Yukon Human Rights Act acknowledges that employers are liable for their employees' behaviour — and thus responsible for damages doled out — "unless it is established that the employer did not consent to the conduct and took care to prevent the conduct or, after learning of the conduct, tried to rectify the situation.”

The judge seized on that point.

"There has to be notice that there's a potential issue of discriminatory conduct ... then once they're notified, the potential liability kicks in under Section 35 (of the Yukon Human Rights Act).

"You can't place the responsibility on the employer unless the employer knows it exists,” he paraphrased.

Bachus did not relent: "Part of the process is seeking redress for that injury.”

The $15,000 Hanson is seeking is high compared with other human rights awards, her lawyer acknowledged. But he said there was a progressive increase in awards by quasi-judicial human rights panels across the country.

In 2005, the awards cap in Ontario was $10,000, and that was for the most egregious human rights violations, presuming they do not veer into criminal territory like assault or uttering threats.

The board's "denial of damages even in the face of its own finding that she suffered injuries amounts to clear errors of law,” Bachus concluded.

"It would not do justice to Ms. Hanson to subject her to another process.... It would be a huge expense.”

The appeal process is slated to wrap up today, as Hureau's lawyer James Tucker concludes his arguments starting at 2 p.m.