Russell G. Juriansz

The appellant union filed a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission alleging wage discrimination between predominantly male and female job classifications.

An investigator evaluated the jobs using the Aiken Plan and recommended dismissing the complaint as unsubstantiated.

The Commission adopted the report and dismissed the complaint without a formal hearing.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that the Commission's decision under s. 36(3) of the Canadian Human Rights Act was administrative, not judicial or quasi-judicial, and therefore not reviewable under s. 28 of the Federal Court Act.

The Court further found that the Commission had met its duty of procedural fairness by providing the investigator's report and allowing written submissions.

The applicant filed a motion in the Supreme Court of Canada seeking an extension of time to bring an application for leave to appeal from a judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal.

The Court identified a jurisdictional gap in the statutory framework regarding which court has the authority to extend the time for such applications.

The Court concluded that the combined operation of the Federal Court Act and the Supreme Court Act dictates that the authority to extend the sixty-day period rests exclusively with a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal, not the Supreme Court.

Consequently, the motion was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.