Jula Hughes

An employee filed a human rights complaint alleging age discrimination after being forced to retire at 65 pursuant to a mandatory retirement policy in his employer's pension plan.

The New Brunswick Human Rights Code exempts terminations made pursuant to a 'bona fide pension plan'.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that the Meiorin test for bona fide occupational requirements does not apply to pension plans.

Instead, a bona fide pension plan is one that is subjectively and objectively legitimate, adopted in good faith, and not a sham to defeat protected rights.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellant challenged the institutional independence and impartiality of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, arguing that the Canadian Human Rights Commission's power to issue binding guidelines and the Tribunal Chairperson's power to extend members' terms compromised procedural fairness.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that the Tribunal's main function is adjudicative but it also serves to implement government policy, warranting a lower standard of independence than a court.

The Court found that the guideline power is a form of law that does not fetter the Tribunal improperly, and the power to extend appointments does not threaten security of tenure or impartiality.