A ruling by the Yukon Human Rights Board of Adjudication is now in the hands of the Yukon Supreme Court.

Mark Hureau has appealed the board's Aug. 21 finding that he sexually harassed Devon Hanson, a former staffer and high school basketball player who he coached.

Hureau's lawyer, James Tucker, filed the appeal Wednesday.

In the appeal documents filed against Hanson and the Yukon Human Rights Commission (which referred the case to the board), Hureau calls on the court to overturn the decision and order a new hearing.

He is also seeking the costs of the appeal to be paid by the board, commission and Hanson.

Last month's ruling by the board came two months after a six-day hearing where seven witnesses testified in addition to both Hureau and Hanson offering their version of events.

Much of the evidence focused on portions of text and email conversations between the two, with Hureau arguing the emails and texts were taken out of context.

Hanson eventually left her job at Hureau's Intersport shop over the matter.

The 21-page decision by the board in August stated the harassment was on the "most mild end of the spectrum” of sexual harassment though it still constituted sexual harassment.

It also made note of the power imbalance, age gap and generation communications issues between the then 43-year-old Hureau and the 18-year-old Hanson.

The board, it's argued in the appeal documents filed this week, erred on several fronts in its decision, including:

• when it misapprehended and misapplied the standard of proof to be used when looking at whether Hureau's actions amounted to sexual harassment;

• in failing to give consideration to contradictory evidence that came forward;

• in failing to give reasons that provided a "logical nexus between the evidence and the finding of sexual harassment”;

• in failing to indicate what weight was given to certain evidence;

• in doing and relying on its own research without providing the parties a chance to challange or respond to it;

• in relying on "inaccuracies in the evidence before it”;

• in failing to apply or in misapplying the legal test for sexual harassment;

• when it broadly accepted evidence as similar act evidence and failed to apply any test to determine whether the accepted evidence was similar act evidence; and

• when it accepted evidence as similar act evidence and then failed to allocate the weight and relevance to be given to that sort of evidence.

Hanson, the board and the commission will have time to file an appearance to the appeal.

They must be filed within seven days if the appeal documents are served within the territory or 21 days if they are outside the territory but within Canada.

Hureau applied for a case management meeting to be held on Oct. 23.

By STEPHANIE WADDELL

Star Reporter