The Court dismissed an application for a judicial review of a decision of the Director of Human Rights, directing that a complaint against the Appellant proceed to a hearing before an adjudication panel of the Northwest Territories Human Rights Commission. The Court found that there was no breach of procedural fairness, abuse of discretion, or errors of law.l

26. December 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Disability – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Correctness Diavik Diamond Mines Inc. v. Northwest Territories (Director of Human Rights), [2007] N.W.T.J. No. 89, Northwest Territories Supreme Court, ...

An employee of the Government of Canada (“Johnson”) succeeded in setting aside the settlement of his Human Rights complaint that had been approved by the Canadian Human Rights Commission (the “Commission”) after a conciliation session where a letter of understanding had been drafted containing a number of agreements reached by the parties

27. November 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Employment law – Appointment – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Race – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Johnson v. Canada (Attorney General), [2007] F.C.J. No 1323, Federal Court, October 4, 2007, O’Keefe J. In April 2003, Johnson filed ...

The City of Calgary was successful in having the Court set aside the decision of the Chief Commissioner of the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission where the Court found that the Chief Commissioner’s decision was unreasonable as it compared the situation of the disabled complainant (“Halfyard”) with other groups of employees not contemplated by the relevant section of the Collective Agreement

25. September 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Human Rights – Discrimination – Disability – Age – Labour law – Collective agreements – Workers compensation – Benefits – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Calgary (City) v. Alberta (Human Rights and Citizenship Commission), [2007] A.J. No. 852, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, ...

A former employee of MacMillan Bloedel Limited who was injured in a car accident in 1979 (“Andrews”) was unsuccessful on his application for judicial review of a decision of the Human Rights Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) refusing to accept his complaint for filing because it did not allege facts which, if proven, could be discrimination under the Human Rights Code, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 210 (the “Code”)

25. September 2007 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Disability – Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Labour law – Collective agreements – Judicial review – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Andrews v. British Columbia (Human Rights Tribunal), [2007] B.C.J. No. 1608, Supreme Court of British Columbia, July ...

The Human Rights Tribunal had found that the Petitioners had discriminated against the Respondent by refusing him taxi service based on his physical disability. The reviewing court upheld the finding of discrimination as reasonable, but set aside the monetary penalty, as the Petitioners had not been accorded a right to respond on the issue of remedy.

28. August 2007 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Disability – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Judicial review – Natural justice – Damages – Remedies Foglia v. Edwards, [2007] B.C.J. No. 1301, British Columbia Supreme Court, June 14, 2007, McEwan J. The Respondent had filed a complaint alleging discrimination against the Petitioners on the basis ...

The Appellant appealed from a decision of the Human Rights Tribunal, finding that he had violated provisions of the Human Rights Code when he terminated the employment of two Complainants. The Tribunal had ordered the Appellant to pay damages to the Complainants and also made three “public interest orders”. The Court varied the compensation awards and set aside the public interest orders, finding that they were unsupported by any reasons.

28. August 2007 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Gender – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Judicial review – Similar fact evidence – admissibility – Failure to provide adequate reasons – Natural justice Papa Joe’s Pizza v. Ontario (Human Rights Commission), [2007] O.J. No. 2499, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, June 26, 2007, D.R. ...

A woman who had alleged discrimination in her employment at British Columbia Court Services (“Solowan”) was unsuccessful in her Application for judicial review of a decision by the Human Rights Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) wherein the Tribunal concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to reopen her complaint, which had been dismissed in 1996 by the B.C. Council of Human Rights (the “Council”), a statutory predecessor of the Tribunal

24. July 2007 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Jurisdiction – Judicial review – Delay – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Correctness Solowan v. British Columbia (Attorney General), [2007] B.C.J. No 1167, British Columbia Supreme Court, May 31, 2007, C.L. Smith J. In 1995, Solowan ...

An employee of the federal public service (“Comstock”) was unsuccessful in her application for a judicial review of two decisions of the Canadian Human Rights Commission (the “Commission”) in which the Commission had rejected her complaint regarding discrimination based on religion on the grounds that the complaint was beyond the jurisdiction of the Commission because she had failed to link a prohibited ground of discrimination to the requirement that she pay dues to her union, the Public Service Alliance of Canada (“PSAC”)

26. June 2007 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Religion – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Jurisdiction to hear a complaint – Labour law – Collective agreements – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Correctness – Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Freedom of expression Comstock ...

The Court allowed an application for judicial review of a decision of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (“Tribunal”) which upheld two procurement complaints advanced by Trust Business Systems (“Trust”). The Court held that there was no evidence to support a finding that a “no substitute clause” was done for the purpose of avoiding competition and discriminating between suppliers, and there was clear evidence that this clause related to legitimate operational requirements. The conclusion of the Tribunal was therefore patently unreasonable.

22. May 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – International Trade Tribunal – Interpretation of Evidence – Terms of agreement – Procurements – Suppliers – Discrimination – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Canada (Attorney General) v. Trust Business Systems, [2007] F.C.J. No. 379, Federal Court of Appeal, March 6, 2007, Nadone, Malone and ...

A forestry company (“International”) was unsuccessful on an application for judicial review from a decision of the BC Human Rights Tribunal (“Tribunal”) that a voluntary severance agreement (“Agreement”) ratified by the forestry workers union discriminated against non-active employees because active employees were offered severance pay under the Agreement, whereas non-active employees were not

24. April 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Disability –  Employment law – Severance pay – Labour law – Collective agreements – Judicial review – Evidence – Jurisdiction – Standard of review – Correctness International Forest Products Ltd. v. Sandhu, [2007] B.C.J. No. 289, British Columbia Supreme Court, February ...