The Alberta Court of Appeal held that there is no human rights defence to a professional who steals narcotics and forges related records, notwithstanding that the professional has a narcotic dependency

23. October 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Nurses – Nurses – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming –  Addiction –  Penalties and suspensions – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Judicial review –  Evidence Wright v. College and Assn. of Registered Nurses of Alberta (Appeals Committee), [2012] A.J. No. 943, ...

A partner in a limited liability partnership is not an employee of the partnership for the purpose of claiming protection of human rights legislation from age discrimination. The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal and the Supreme Court, on judicial review, decided that for the purposes of human rights legislation, a partnership may be treated as a separate legal entity from its partners and as the employer of the partner, resulting the Tribunal having jurisdiction to hear a complaint by a partner of discrimination in his employment. On appeal by the partnership, the Court of Appeal found that the principles of interpretation of the Human Rights Code, RSBC 1996, c.210, which mandated a broad, liberal approach consistent with its remedial purposes, do not extend to overriding the fundamental and well-established principle of law that a partnership, is not, in law, a separate entity but a collective of its partners. As such, it cannot in law be an employer of a partner. The Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the complaint and the appeal was allowed.

25. September 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Age – Statutory interpretation – Employment law – Employee – definition – Partnerships – Mandatory retirement – Judicial review – Jurisdiction – Compliance with legislation Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP v. British Columbia (Human Rights Tribunal), [2012] B.C.J. ...

The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (the “Adjudicator”) found that a police constable, Michael Shaw, (“Shaw”) discriminated against a Canada Post carrier, Ronald Phipps (“Phipps”) contrary to the Human Rights Code, RSO 1990 c.19 (the “Code”). Shaw’s appeal from the judicial review upholding the Adjudicator’s decision was dismissed.

24. July 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Adjudication – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Race – Police officers – Judicial review – Evidence – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Toronto (City) Police Service v. Phipps, [2012] OJ 2601, 2012 ONCA 155, Ontario Court of ...

The Ontario Divisional Court quashed the decision of the Human Rights Tribunal that a librarian discriminated against the black complainants by asking them in a lawyers’ lounge for the exclusive use by lawyers and law students to confirm they were lawyers. The Tribunal erred in finding a prima facie case of discrimination. There must be some link, or nexus, between membership in a protected group and the allegedly discriminatory act. A complainant must do more than identify himself as a member of a protected group and point to an act that negatively impacted on him. A complainant must establish a causal link. In this case, there was no evidence of distinction or differential treatment or that such treatment was motivated by race or colour. By failing to require complainants to satisfy the nexus requirement, the Tribunal erred by reversing the burden of proof and placed an impossible onus on the applicants to disprove discrimination.

24. April 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Human Rights – Discrimination – Race – Judicial review – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Peel Law Assn. v. Pieters, [2012] O.J. No. 684, 2012 ONSC 1048, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, February 13, 2012, S. Chapnik, P.B. Hockin and ...

The Court found, on judicial review, that the decision of the Director of Human Rights Commission extending the time to file a human rights complaint was unreasonable. The 12 month deadline to file a complaint ran until the formal complaint was made. The statutory scheme under the Human Rights Act, R.S.N.S. 1989, c.219 is premised on a formal complaint and a process of inquiry based on it. The Commission also breached its duty of procedural fairness by not giving the applicant employer, ExxonMobil Canada Ltd., a copy of the respondent employee’s request for an extension prior to the Director making a decision. Finally, there was no basis for a finding of exceptional circumstances because of the respondent’s counsel’s communications with the Commission led counsel to believe that the deadline to file a complaint was extended. The communications between counsel and the commission were about the administratively imposed 28 days for completing the intake questionnaire, not the 12 month statutory deadline. Also, those communications about extending time occurred after the statutory deadline had expired.

25. January 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Judicial review – Limitations – Extension of time – Compliance with legislation – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter ExxonMobil Canada Ltd. v. Carpenter, [2011] N.S.J. No. 649, 2011 NSSC 445, Nova Scotia Supreme Court, December ...

The application by a corporation to dismiss, for delay, a prospective employee’s application for judicial review of a human rights tribunal’s decision was allowed where the prospective employee did not file for a judicial review until 26 months following the decision and had no cogent explanation for the delay

25. January 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Human Rights complaints – Discrimination – Judicial review – Delay – Limitation of actions De Pelham v. Ontario (Human Rights Tribunal), [2011] O.J. No. 5459, 2011 ONSC 7006, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, November 25, 2011, A. Hoy J. Mytrak Health Systems Inc. (“Mytrak”) was a small ...

The respondent registrant appealed a College decision to the Health Professions Appeal Review Board (“HPARB”) and made a complaint to the Ontario Human Rights Commission about the College’s decision. The HPARB upheld the College’s decision and the College then applied to the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal to have her complaint dismissed. The Tribunal refused to dismiss it and the College applied for judicial review and obtained an order quashing the Tribunal’s decision.

27. December 2011 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Nurses – Human Rights Tribunal – Nurses – Disciplinary proceedings – Public interest – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Disability – Duty to accommodate – Judicial review – Appeals – Investigations – Standard of review – Correctness – Compliance with legislation – Privative clauses ...

The appellant ship captain was unsuccessful in his appeal of a decision by the Worker’s Compensation Appeal Tribunal which upheld the respondent’s decision to dismiss the appellant following the sinking of his ship

27. December 2011 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Employment law – Termination of employment – Discrimination – Judicial review – Application – Evidence Henthorne v. British Columbia Ferry Services Inc., [2011] B.C.J. No. 2228, 2011 BCCA 476, British Columbia Court of Appeal, November 24, 2011, M.V. Newbury, H. Groberman and N.J. ...

Howard Johnson Inn (“Howard Johnson”) and their employee John Pontes (“Pontes”) were unsuccessful in appealing a Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) finding that they had discriminated against a First Nations man (“Tataquason”)

22. November 2011 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Race – Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Equality rights – Judicial review – Bias – Compliance with legislation Howard Johnson Inn v. Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal, [2011] S.J. No. 599, 2011 SKCA 110, Saskatchewan Court of ...

The Supreme Court of Canada set aside a Human Rights Tribunal decision on the basis that the doctrines of issue estoppel, collateral attack, res judicata and abuse of process applied to prevent the Tribunal from considering complaints that had already been dealt with by the Workers’ Compensation Board review division

22. November 2011 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Benefits – Human Rights Tribunal – Discrimination – Judicial review – Administrative tribunals – Compliance with legislation – Estoppel and res judicata British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Board) v. Figliola, [2011] S.C.J. No. 52, Supreme Court of Canada, October 27, 2011, McLachlin C.J. and ...