3 total
Tribunal awards $15,000 for injury to dignity and orders taxi company to offer shareholder opportunity.
Following a finding of reprisal and discrimination, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario determined the appropriate remedy for the applicant.
The Tribunal declined to award lost wages, finding the applicant's wage loss was not directly attributable to the respondents' conduct.
However, to remedy the loss of opportunity caused by the respondents' reprisal, the Tribunal ordered the respondents to offer the applicant the opportunity to become a shareholder at fair market value as of April 2007.
The Tribunal also awarded $15,000 for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect, and ordered the respondents to retain a human rights professional to review and improve their policies for selecting shareholders.
Mother's motion to relocate with children denied; father and grandparents granted extended access.
The applicant mother brought a motion to vary a final order to permit her to relocate with the parties' two children to Tamworth to live with her new partner.
The respondent father brought a cross-motion seeking custody, shared parenting, or increased access, and the paternal grandparents sought specific access.
The court applied the Gordon v. Goertz framework and found that the move would be highly disruptive to the children, particularly given one child's special needs and their strong attachment to the family farm and paternal grandparents.
The mother's request to relocate was dismissed.
The court ordered extended access for the father and a specific access schedule for the grandparents.
RCMP exclusion from federal labour regime upheld against Charter challenge.
An RCMP officer challenged the constitutionality of legislation excluding RCMP members from the federal public sector labour relations regime, alleging infringements of freedom of association, freedom of expression, and equality rights under the Charter.
The majority held that s. 2(d) protects the formation of independent employee associations and lawful collective activity, but does not require Parliament to include RCMP members within a particular statutory labour relations scheme.
The majority further held that the exclusions did not infringe s. 2(b) or s. 15(1), emphasizing that the Charter generally imposes no positive obligation of legislative inclusion absent exceptional circumstances.
The appeal was dismissed, with a dissent concluding that the exclusion had an anti-associational purpose and failed s. 1 justification.
