In human rights cases, the burden of proof operates as follows: Applicants (i.e. those making a complaint) must first prove a prima facie case of discrimination. If the Applicant is able to do that, the burden of proof then shifts to the Respondent (e.g. the employer) to prove that it did NOT violate the Code.

Which one of the following points is NOT true:

The key benefit of this approach is that it reduces the evidentiary burden (the burden of proof) on the Applicant.

The phrase "prima facie" means "on the face of it"

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination, Applicants must show that they are a member of a group protected by the Code, they were subject to adverse (negative) treatment, and discrimination based on the protected ground (e.g. disability) was the primary reason for the adverse treatment

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination, Applicants must show that they are a member of a group protected by the Code, they were subject to adverse (negative) treatment, and there was a connection between the protected ground (e.g. disability) and the adverse treatment.