A British Columbia woman is taking the province’s Human Rights Tribunal to court after being slapped with a $10,000 fine for expressing personal concerns to a longtime friend about a planned medical procedure.

Kirstin Olsen has filed a petition with the BC Supreme Court challenging the Tribunal’s January 2025 ruling, which penalized her for what it called discriminatory speech during a private conversation with her then-friend, Theresa (Terry) Wiebe, who identifies as transgender.

Go Ad Free

The two had been close for years. From 2014 to 2018, Olsen even let Wiebe live in a motorhome on her property for a modest $200 a month. In 2017, when Wiebe told Olsen she planned to undergo a mastectomy as part of her gender transition, Olsen—who had witnessed her own mother’s struggle with breast cancer and a double mastectomy—expressed discomfort and concern about the decision.

Despite the conversation, the friendship continued for a time. Olsen later even paid for Wiebe to return to BC from the Yukon after a hospitalization related to hormone therapy. But in 2018, after tensions with others living on the property, Olsen asked Wiebe to leave. The Tribunal later found the eviction was unrelated to Wiebe’s transgender status.

However, the Tribunal still ruled Olsen’s earlier comments about the mastectomy constituted discrimination and caused “injury to dignity”—resulting in the $10,000 fine. Notably, the ruling made no reference to Olsen’s Charter right to freedom of expression.

“The Tribunal never considered the impact of its decision on free speech,” reads Olsen’s legal challenge, filed March 21, 2025.

Constitutional lawyer Marty Moore, representing Olsen, called the ruling an alarming overreach.

“It is very concerning to see a government tribunal policing private communications between friends and imposing a $10,000 penalty,” Moore said. “A comment of concern for a friend is very different than evicting someone from their home based on race, religion, or sex. The Tribunal should focus on real discrimination—not turning personal conversations into punishable offences.”

Olsen’s case is a test of how far human rights commissions can reach into private life—and whether the right to express concern is now a finable offence in Canada.