One Step Forward, Two Steps Backwards: How the Indian Act may restrict various marginalized groups from accessing justice January 17, 2018 Tavlin Kaur A recent case heard by the Supreme Court of Canada, Canadian Human Rights Commission v. Attorney General of Canada, may have significant implications for individuals who rely on federal government benefits. The case involves a challenge to the registration provision of the federal Indian Act.
16th Annual Charter Conference January 17, 2018 The 16th Annual Charter of Rights and Freedoms Conference took place on October 2, 2017 at the OBA’s offices in Toronto. This article summarizes the Conference’s four panels, as well as the Year in Review presentation.
Childcare, Summer Jobs, and Religious Discrimination in Canada* January 17, 2018 Derek Ross 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.
What to Expect When You Are Expecting: Determining the Rights and Remedies Available for Pregnancy-Based Discrimination December 13, 2017 Richa Sandill 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.
The New Law Society Requirements to Address Barriers Faced by Racialized Licensees: Steps Law Firms Are Taking November 23, 2017 Ashley Schuitema is a lawyer at Ursel Phillips Fellows Hopkinson LLP. Her practice focuses on the representation of trade unions, associations and employees. Ashley can be contacted at aschuitema@upfhlaw.ca. The Law Society is implementing various recommendations approved by Convocation in December 2016 to address barriers faced by racialized licensees and to address issues of systemic racism in the legal profession. Three partners at three different law firms are interviewed to find out what steps their firms have taken in preparation to meet these new requirements.
Gehl v Canada: Circumscribing the Role of Charter Values? November 16, 2017 John Wilson and Guy Régimbald 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.
Naming Appropriate Respondents in Human Rights Applications November 15, 2017 Wade Poziomka 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.
Ontario’s Education Equity Action Plan: The New Requirement for Race-Based Data Collection October 02, 2017 Kate Shao On September 7, 2017, the Ministry of Education announced their three-year plan for education equity. The “Education Equity Action Plan” will serve as a roadmap in the province’s effort to identify and eliminate systemic barriers to student success.
Human Rights Update - The Top Five June 29, 2017 Kathryn L. Meehan There have been some interesting developments from the courts and the Human Rights Tribunal in the past several months. It was a difficult choice, but the following five decisions are perhaps the most noteworthy, particularly for the employment and labour law bar.
Supreme Court of Canada Confirms Termination of Disabled Employee Not a Breach of Human Rights June 21, 2017 Shivani Chopra and Kathryn Bird 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.