Articles 2021

Disqualifying otherwise eligible recipients from a public benefit because of their religious beliefs is unacceptable in a liberal democracy. Yet that is the effect of two recent government initiatives in Canada.

Despite years of law reform, human rights advancements, and progression of women in the workplace, discrimination against pregnant employees and workers is still a reality for many women in Ontario, and Canada.

In Gehl v Canada (2017), the concurring reasons of Justices Lauwers and Miller include a sustained criticism of the concept and application of Charter values in judicial reasoning. We reply to the concurring judgment’s critique of Charter values.

Over the past few years, a troubling trend has emerged in the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario’s case law relating to the naming and removal of individual respondents. In an effort to counter the inappropriate naming of individual respondents, the Tribunal's jurisprudence now encroaches into the territory of appropriately named individual respondents.

In Stewart v. Elk Valley Coal Corp., the Supreme Court of Canada has upheld a decision of the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal (Tribunal) which concluded that an employee who had a cocaine addiction was not dismissed because of that addiction; rather, he was dismissed for breaching his employer’s Alcohol, Illegal Drugs & Medical Policy (Policy). No prima facie discrimination was found and the decision of the Tribunal dismissing the employee’s complaint was therefore reasonable.

Despite the Ontario Court of Appeal’s guidance in its seminal ruling on racial profiling in R v. Brown fourteen years ago, this continues to be a pervasive and widespread issue. This was highlighted in a recent joint program held by the OBA Criminal Justice and Constitutional, Civil Liberties, and Human Rights Law Sections.

In February, 2017, the plaintiffs’ months-long trial was set to begin before the Honourable Justice Lederer. Following a recently announced settlement, lawyer Phil Tunley provides insights about trial preparation, client management and advancing Charter claims in the context of some of the worst human rights abuses ever litigated in Canada.

Note on Elmardy v. Toronto Police Services Board - a recent decision by Ontario's Divisional Court, which awarded $50,000 for Charter breaches against the TPSB and a police officer in its employ.

In August, 2016, the Prime Minister appointed an independent advisory board to review applications and propose candidates for a vacancy on the Supreme Court of Canada. The committee presented a list of qualified candidates to the Prime Minister, resulting in the appointment of Mr. Justice Malcome Rowe of Newfoundland to the Court in October 2016. The Independent Advisory Board reported to Parliament and publicly released a report of its process in November, 2016.

The principle of non-discrimination is now well established in Canadian human rights law. Each of the federal, provincial, and territorial governments prohibit discrimination in the provision of goods, facilities, services, and accommodation, or some combination thereof. While this principle is rightly considered to be within the domain of human rights law, a non-discrimination principle also exists in a very different context: transportation law.