In Ontario Human Rights Commission Et Al

In Ontario Human Rights Commission et al. v. Simpsons-Sears Ltd., the Supreme Court of Canada

A) concluded that it is unnecessary to accommodate an employee when doing so would inconvenience the employer.
B) determined that it is the intention to discriminate that is relevant, not whether or not discrimination actually occurred.
C) held that religious discrimination is acceptable in the workplace.
D) found that the employer was required to take reasonable steps to accommodate the religious practices of an employee.
E) decided that only certain religions are worthy of protection under human rights legislation.