Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The tribunal holds hearings to investigate complaints of discriminatory practices and may order a respondent to a complaint to cease a practice, as well as order a respondent to pay compensation to the complainant. [1] Decisions of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal are reviewable by Canada's Federal Court. Federal Court decisions can then be ...
The Human Rights Tribunal found that the Superintendent directly discriminated and ordered a reassessment of his (Grismer's) visual abilities. A judge of the Supreme Court of British Columbia dismissed the Superintendent's petition for judicial review but the Court of Appeal set aside that decision.
It was argued that Kavanagh's incarceration in a male prison, her deprival of the hormone therapies that she had previously been taking, and the lack of surgical sex-reassignment options that were available to her all constituted violations of section 5 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. Ultimately the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruled that ...
A Canadian town near the U.S ... a population of about 1,300 and is situated near the border with Minnesota, was found to have violated the Ontario Human Rights Code by the Human Rights Tribunal ...
Sexual orientation was not a prohibited ground of discrimination at that time, so he argued that he had been discriminated against on the basis of his "family status", under section 3 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal found in his favour, but the government appealed to the Federal Court of Appeal and the ...
On July 10, 1997, Vaid complained to the Canadian Human Rights Commission, claiming that the Speaker and the House of Commons discriminated against him due to race, colour, and national or ethnic origin. Vaid also claimed workplace harassment. The complaints were referred to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. Parent and the House of Commons ...
In June 2018, the Supreme Court found that the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal's determination that the Indian Act did not violate the Canadian Human Rights Act was reasonable. Three concurring justices argued that the context instead required review for correctness. [13]
[15] For the reasons that follow, I agree with the Court of Appeal that the Tribunal's decision was incorrect and that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction over Mr. McCormick's relationship with the firm, but do not accept that a partner can never be an employee for purposes of the Code. The key is the degree of control and dependency.