Under the Washington State Administrative Code (hereinafter, “WAC”), what are the Washington State Human Rights Commission (hereinafter, “WSHRC”) regulations concerning sanctions? Here’s my point of view.
IMPORTANT: All hyperlinks in this article with an asterisk (*) will take the reader away from this website to either our Williams Law Group Blog* or an official governmental website. This article is for informational purposes only and is based upon my point of view. Due to the rapidly changing nature of the law, we make no warranty or guarantee concerning the accuracy or reliability of the content in this article. No content on this site, regardless of date, should ever be used as a substitute for direct legal advice from your attorney. Please review our Disclaimer|Terms of Use|Privacy Policy before proceeding.
Advertisement
WSHRC: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: SANCTIONS
In administrative law, procedural compliance is essential to ensuring fairness and efficiency. Washington State’s Administrative Code, specifically WAC 162-08-015*, outlines the authority of administrative law judges and the Washington State Human Rights Commission to impose sanctions for misconduct or procedural abuse during administrative proceedings. This provision plays a critical role in maintaining the integrity of administrative processes, especially in cases related to discrimination and civil rights enforcement. The relevant provision states as follows:
WAC 162-08-015
Sanctions.
(1) Administrative hearings. In a case which has been noted for hearing the administrative law judge, on his or her own initiative or on motion of a party, may order a party or counsel who uses these rules for the purpose of delay, or who fails to comply with these rules or other procedures previously ordered, to satisfy terms or pay compensatory damages including attorney’s fees to any other person who has been harmed by the delay or the failure to comply. The administrative law judge may condition the right of a party to take specific action or raise specific defenses on satisfaction of the terms of the order or payment of the damages and attorney’s fees. The administrative law judge may condition the right of a counsel to participate further in the case upon satisfaction of the terms of an order or payment of the damages and attorney’s fees. The administrative law judge shall incorporate in his or her final order any sanctions order which has not been complied with, so that the sanctions order may be enforced as provided in RCW 49.60.260* and 49.60.270* and appealed from as provided in RCW 34.05.514*.
(2) Other proceedings. In a proceeding not covered by subsection (1) of this section, the chairperson of the commission may order a person or counsel who uses these rules for the purpose of delay, or who fails to comply with these rules or other procedures previously ordered, to satisfy terms, and the chairperson may condition further participation in a proceeding on compliance with these rules or orders imposing terms, but the chairperson of the commission shall not impose sanctions in the form of payment of damages or attorney’s fees.
WAC 162-08-015*.
OVERVIEW OF WAC 162-08-015
WAC 162-08-015* sets forth two primary categories where sanctions may be imposed: administrative hearings and other commission proceedings. Each category has distinct rules and enforcement mechanisms designed to deter misuse of the process and ensure accountability.
1. Sanctions in Administrative Hearings
When a case proceeds to a formal hearing, the administrative law judge (ALJ) is empowered to issue sanctions against parties or their legal representatives. These sanctions may arise under the following circumstances:
a. Using procedural rules for delay: If a party or attorney exploits the rules solely to stall the process.
b. Non-compliance: If there is a failure to follow procedural requirements or prior orders from the ALJ.
In such cases, the ALJ may require the offending party or attorney to:
• Satisfy certain terms (such as taking remedial actions),
• Pay compensatory damages,
• Reimburse attorney’s fees incurred by the opposing party.
Importantly, the ALJ may condition further participation in the hearing on compliance with these sanctions. This includes limiting the party’s ability to take actions or raise defenses until the sanctions are fulfilled.
Any unresolved sanctions at the time of the final ruling are incorporated into the final order, making them enforceable under RCW 49.60.260* and RCW 49.60.270*, and subject to appeal as described in RCW 34.05.514*.
2. Sanctions in Other Proceedings
Outside of formal hearings—such as during investigations or informal commission processes—the Chairperson of the Washington State Human Rights Commission holds similar, though more limited, authority.
In these contexts, if a person or attorney causes delay or violates procedural rules or orders, the Chairperson can:
• Impose conditions for continued participation in the proceeding,
• Order compliance with previously established rules or directives.
However, unlike in administrative hearings, the Chairperson cannot order the payment of damages or attorney’s fees in these situations.
IMPORTANCE AND IMPACT
The inclusion of sanctions in WAC 162-08-015 reinforces a critical principle in administrative justice: that efficiency and fairness must be preserved throughout the legal process. By allowing for compensatory remedies in formal settings and enforcing procedural discipline in informal ones, the regulation discourages frivolous tactics and promotes respectful engagement.
These provisions also help protect claimants and respondents alike from unnecessary delays and expenses, especially in matters involving civil rights and discrimination claims—areas where timely resolution is often essential to justice.
FINAL THOUGHTS
WAC 162-08-015* is a valuable tool in Washington State’s administrative framework, promoting accountability among participants in legal proceedings under the Human Rights Commission’s jurisdiction. Whether you are a party to a case or a legal representative, understanding this regulation is essential for navigating administrative hearings with integrity and professionalism.
If you are involved in a case before the Washington State Human Rights Commission, it’s wise to consult with an attorney who understands the nuances of administrative law and can help ensure compliance with all applicable rules—including WAC 162-08-015*.
RELATED ARTICLES
We invite you to read more of our articles related to this topic:
» WA State Human Rights Commission Complaints
» WA State Human Rights Commission: Functions, Powers, and Duties
» WSHRC: From Complaint to Conclusion
LEARN MORE
If you would like to learn more, then consider contacting an experienced attorney to discuss your case. This article is not offered as legal advice and will not establish an attorney-client relationship with Law Office of Gregory A. Williams or the author of this article; please refer to our Disclaimer | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy for more information.
-gw