J. Craig Morrison

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment based on age and disability.

The respondent requested to dismiss the application under section 45.1 of the Human Rights Code, arguing that withdrawn grievances had appropriately dealt with the substance of the application.

The Tribunal denied the request to dismiss, noting that withdrawn grievances do not satisfy section 45.1.

The Tribunal also granted the Union's request to intervene, finding it had a significant interest in the matter due to the applicant's allegations of unsupportive union representation.

The City of Ottawa sought judicial review of an Arbitration Board decision that reinstated an employee who had been terminated for excessive absenteeism under a Last Chance Agreement.

The Board found that the employee suffered from a disability (an anxio-depressive state) and that the City discriminated against her by counting disability-related absences toward the threshold in the agreement.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, holding that the appropriate standard of review was patent unreasonableness and that the Board's findings of disability and prima facie discrimination were supported by the evidence and not patently unreasonable.

The respondent, a licensed taxicab driver, was charged with operating an unlicensed taxicab after picking up a fare in the former City of Ottawa.

He had been licensed by the former City of Gloucester and complied with the new amalgamated City of Ottawa's licensing requirements.

The summary conviction appeal judge acquitted him, finding the old pre-amalgamation taxi zones were dissolved.

The City appealed, seeking to amend the Certificate of Offence to specify a different by-law provision.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the motion to amend, finding it would cause prejudice and injustice given the lack of evidence and the late stage of the proceeding.

The appeal was dismissed, as there was no evidence the respondent drove an unlicensed taxicab under the charged provision.

The applicant union sought to enforce Minutes of Settlement against the responding company and its principal, Rocco Cambareri.

The company had defaulted on its payment schedule and breached the collective agreement, triggering a personal liability clause in the settlement.

The responding parties failed to file a proper response or attend the hearing.

The Board deemed the facts asserted by the applicant to be accepted, found that the conditions precedent for personal liability had been met, and ordered Rocco Cambareri to pay $137,000 to the applicant.