Employer’s refusal to allow a woman who had taken maternity and parental leave to return to work at the conclusion of her leave can be discrimination on the basis of sex. However, in such a case, the Human Rights Tribunal must consider all of the circumstances and ask whether it is reasonable to infer that the maternity leave was a causative factor in the refusal to continue employment. Where the refusal to continue the woman’s employment following maternity leave is based not on the prohibited ground of sex, but rather on the basis of customer or employer preference for the replacement worker, and where valid reasons are provided for the preference, unconnected to any prohibited grounds, an inference of discrimination will not be justified.

24. March 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Gender – Employment law – Termination of employment – Judicial review – Evidence Human Rights Commission v. Newfoundland and Labrador (Minister of Health and Community Services), [2009] N.J. No. 34, 2009 NLCA 9, Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme ...

An application for judicial review of two decisions of the Manitoba Board of Adjudictation which upheld complaints filed by twin sisters that they had suffered discrimination on the basis of gender by being denied an opportunity to try out for the male hockey team at their school. The Court dismissed the application and upheld the decision of the Manitoba Board of Adjudication.

25. March 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Board of Adjudication – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Test – Gender – Judicial review -Jurisdiction of tribunal – Standard of review – Correctness – Reasonableness simpliciter Manitoba High Schools Athletic Association Inc. v. Pasternak, [2008] M.J. No. 10, Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench, January 21, ...

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. ...

The Court dismissed an appeal from a judicial review decision which had held that the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal had erred when it found that it had jurisdiction to hear the complaint of some female members of a private golf club who were excluded from the men’s lounge. The Court found that the services provided in the men’s lounge were not customarily available to the public and therefore, s.8 of the Human Rights Code did not apply and the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

27. February 2007 0
Administrative law – Human Rights Complaints – Discrimination – Gender – Sexual orientation – Customarily available to the public – Compliance with legislation – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Jurisdiction to hear a complaint – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness Marine Drive Golf Club v. Buntain, [2007] B.C.J. No. 37, British ...

A man (“Crockford”) charged with assault of his female domestic partner appealed from the decision of a chambers judge finding that the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal had no jurisdiction to consider his complaint of discrimination against Crown counsel because Crown counsel provided no “service customarily available to the public” as required under s. 8 of the Human Rights Code.

24. October 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Gender – Judicial review – Jurisdiction of tribunal – Public interest British Columbia v. Crockford, [2006] B.C.J. No. 1724, British Columbia Court of Appeal, August 1, 2006, Huddart, Levine and Smith JJ.A. A chamber’s judge had quashed a preliminary ...

The Nova Scotia Construction Safety Association (the “Association”) appealed from the decision of the Human Rights Commission awarding damages to an employee, Karen Davison (“Davison”), who successfully obtained an award for damages for incidents of sexual harassment during the course of her employment. The appeal was dismissed except that the Order of the Human Rights Board of Inquiry that exemplary damages should be awarded against the Association was overturned.

25. July 2006 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Sexual harassment – Gender – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Damages – Judicial review – Delay – Evidence – Procedural requirements and fairness – Abuse of process – test – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Nova Scotia Construction Safety Assn. v. Nova Scotia (Human Rights ...

An appeal by the University from a judge’s conclusion that the human rights complaint against the University was not defective, was dismissed. A finding of “probable cause” under the old Saskatchewan Human Rights Code was procedural in character. As such, the requirement did not survive recent amendments. The conclusion that the complaint was filed by a person was a finding of fact which was entitled to substantial deference. The judge’s decision on that point was reasonable. The Commission had no obligation to obtain the consent of the person aggrieved to hear the complaint and therefore did not err in failing to consider that question.

27. June 2006 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Gender – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Judicial review – Legislation – Retrospective operation – Procedural requirements and fairness University of Saskatchewan v. Women 2000, [2006] S.J. No. 231, Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, April 17, 2006, Cameron, Richards and Smith JJ.A. A group of ...

The Court set aside, in part, the Human Rights Tribunal’s decision not to dismiss the Complainant’s human rights complaint. The Court also set aside the Tribunal’s order for disclosure of certain documents.

28. March 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Gender – Equality rights – Judicial review – Legislative compliance – Disclosure – Relevance of information disclosed – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness – Correctness Cariboo Chevrolet Pontiac Buick GMC Ltd. v. Becker, [2006] B.C.J. No. 119, British ...

A post-operative male–to-female transsexual (“Nixon”) appealed from a decision on judicial review which found that she was not discriminated against when the Vancouver Rape Relief Society (“Society”) refused to allow her to volunteer as a peer counsellor with their organization

24. January 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Gender – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation Vancouver Rape Relief Society v. Nixon, [2005] B.C.J. No. 2647, British Columbia Court of Appeal, December 7, 2005, Finch C.J.B.C., Southin and Saunders JJ.A. Nixon was born a male but underwent ...

The court held that the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal was without jurisdiction over a complaint arising from the exclusion of women members from the Men’s Lounge at the Marine Drive Golf Club as the Men’s Lounge was not an “accommodations, service or facility customarily available to the public”

27. December 2005 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Gender – Private clubs – Customarily available to the public – Definition – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Jurisdiction – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Correctness Marine Drive Golf Club v. Buntain, [2005] B.C.J. No. 2181, British Columbia Supreme Court, ...