Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

Last updated
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Tribunal canadien des droits de la personne
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal Logo.svg
Established1977
Composition methodAppointment by the Governor in Council on the recommendation of the minister of justice and attorney general
Authorized by Parliament of Canada via the Canadian Human Rights Act
Appeals to Federal Court
Number of positions15
Chairperson
CurrentlyJennifer Khurana
Since2021

The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (French: Tribunal canadien des droits de la personne) is an administrative tribunal established in 1977 through the Canadian Human Rights Act . It is directly funded by the Parliament of Canada and is independent of the Canadian Human Rights Commission which refers cases to it for adjudication under the act.

Contents

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 appealed to the Federal Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada. The Federal Court can also issue and enforce decisions made by the tribunal if violations continue and imprison an offender for contempt of court if a decision continues to be disregarded. This has happened in the cases of John Ross Taylor in 1981 and Tomasz Winnicki in 2006.

Justice Anne Mactavish was appointed Chair of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal in 1998. [2] On November 9, 2003, J. Grant Sinclair succeeded Mactavish as the Chair of the Tribunal. On September 10, 2009, Shirish P. Chotalia was appointed as his successor and served to 2012. Chotalia implemented Access to Justice through customized hearing procedures focussed on restorative justice; parties reported 94 per cent satisfaction. [3] On September 2, 2014, David L. Thomas was appointed the Chair of the Tribunal for a seven-year term.

Previously its Vice-Chairperson, Jennifer Khurana was the Tribunal's acting Chairperson from September 2, 2021 until March 24, 2022. [4] On March 25, 2022, Khurana was appointed the Tribunal's Chairperson for a seven-year term. [4]

In June 2018, the Supreme Court of Canada found that the tribunal's determination that the Indian Act did not violate the Canadian Human Rights Act was reasonable due to judicial deference. [5]

See also

Related Research Articles

In law, certiorari is a court process to seek judicial review of a decision of a lower court or government agency. Certiorari comes from the name of an English prerogative writ, issued by a superior court to direct that the record of the lower court be sent to the superior court for review. The term is Latin for "to be made more certain", and comes from the opening line of such writs, which traditionally began with the Latin words "Certiorari volumus...".

The court system of Canada forms the country's judiciary, formally known as "The King on the Bench", which interprets the law and is made up of many courts differing in levels of legal superiority and separated by jurisdiction. Some of the courts are federal in nature, while others are provincial or territorial.

An administrative law judge (ALJ) in the United States is a judge and trier of fact who both presides over trials and adjudicates claims or disputes involving administrative law. ALJs can administer oaths, take testimony, rule on questions of evidence, and make factual and legal determinations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Freedom of religion in Canada</span> Overview of religious freedom in Canada

Freedom of religion in Canada is a constitutionally protected right, allowing believers the freedom to assemble and worship without limitation or interference.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Employment tribunal</span> Tribunal public bodies in England and Wales and Scotland

Employment tribunals are tribunal public bodies in both England and Wales and Scotland that have statutory jurisdiction to hear disputes between employers and employees.

<i>Canada (House of Commons) v Vaid</i> Supreme Court of Canada case

Canada v Vaid, [2005] 1 S.C.R. 667, 2005 SCC 30 is the leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on parliamentary privilege. The court developed a test for determining when a claim of parliamentary privilege can protect a legislative body or its members from legal scrutiny. Besides the parties to the case, the court heard from the following interveners: the Attorney General of Canada, Senator Serge Joyal, Senator Mobina Jaffer, the Canadian Association of Professional Employees, the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada, and the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

<i>Blencoe v British Columbia (Human Rights Commission)</i> Supreme Court of Canada case

Blencoe v British Columbia (Human Rights Commission), [2000] 2 S.C.R. 307 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the scope of section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and on the administrative law principle of natural justice.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme court</span> Highest court in a jurisdiction

In most legal jurisdictions, a supreme court, also known as a court of last resort, apex court, and highcourt of appeal, is the highest court within the hierarchy of courts. Broadly speaking, the decisions of a supreme court are not subject to further review by any other court. Supreme courts typically function primarily as appellate courts, hearing appeals from decisions of lower trial courts, or from intermediate-level appellate courts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judiciary of Pakistan</span> Hierarchical system with two classes of courts

The judiciary of Pakistan is a hierarchical system with two classes of courts: the superior judiciary and the subordinate judiciary. The superior judiciary is composed of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the Federal Shariat Court and five High Courts, with the Supreme Court at the apex. There is a High Court for each of the four provinces as well as a High Court for the Islamabad Capital Territory. The Constitution of Pakistan entrusts the superior judiciary with the obligation to preserve, protect and defend the constitution. Neither the Supreme Court nor a High Court may exercise jurisdiction in relation to Tribal Areas, except otherwise provided for. The disputed regions of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit–Baltistan have separate court systems.

Terrence Cecil Tremaine is the founder and national director of the National-Socialist Party of Canada. He is a white nationalist organizer who has posted on white nationalist web forums such as Stormfront and other websites using the screen name "mathdoktor99", and on other websites as "JCMateri".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme Court of Spain</span> Highest court in Spain

The Supreme Court is the highest court in the Kingdom of Spain. Originally established pursuant to Title V of the Constitution of 1812 to replace —in all matters that affected justice— the System of Councils, and currently regulated by Title VI of the Constitution of 1978, it has original jurisdiction over cases against high-ranking officials of the Kingdom and over cases regarding illegalization of political parties. It also has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all cases. The Court has the power of judicial review, except for the judicial revision on constitutional matters, reserved to the Constitutional Court.

Al Odah v. United States is a court case filed by the Center for Constitutional Rights and co-counsels challenging the legality of the continued detention as enemy combatants of Guantanamo detainees. It was consolidated with Boumediene v. Bush (2008), which is the lead name of the decision.

Marc Lemire is a Canadian. He works closely with leader Paul Fromm, and is the webmaster of the Hamilton, Ontario-based Freedom-Site which he began in 1996. Formerly of Toronto and now living in Hamilton, Lemire was the last president of the Heritage Front organization from January 1, 2001 until the organization folded around 2005. He was employed as a network analyst in the IT department of the City of Hamilton, Ontario from around 2005 until 2019, when he agreed to resign.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Human rights in Canada</span>

Human rights in Canada have come under increasing public attention and legal protection since World War II. Prior to that time, there were few legal protections for human rights. The protections which did exist focused on specific issues, rather than taking a general approach to human rights.

Anne L. Mactavish is a Canadian jurist who is a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hate speech laws in Canada</span> Canadian laws relating to hate speech

Hate speech laws in Canada include provisions in the federal Criminal Code, as well as statutory provisions relating to hate publications in three provinces and one territory.

The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario is an administrative tribunal in Ontario, Canada that hears and determines applications brought under the Ontario Human Rights Code, the provincial statute that sets out human or civil rights in Ontario prohibiting discrimination on the basis of a number of grounds in certain social areas. It is one of the 13 adjudicative tribunals overseen by the Ministry of the Attorney General that make up Tribunals Ontario. Any person who believes they have been discriminated against under the Human Rights Code may bring an application to the Tribunal.

Cindy Blackstock is a Canadian Gitxsan activist for child welfare and executive director of the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada. She is also a professor for the School of Social Work at McGill University.

The Alberta Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is a quasi-judicial human rights body in Alberta, Canada, created by the provincial government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Human Rights Tribunal of Quebec</span>

The Human Rights Tribunal of Quebec is a specialized first-instance tribunal of the province of Quebec, Canada, that has the jurisdiction to hear and judge litigations concerning discrimination and harassment based on the prohibited grounds stipulated in the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, as well as concerning the exploitation of elderly or handicapped persons and affirmative action programs.

References

  1. Canadian Human Rights Act , RSC 1985, c. H-6.
  2. "The Honourable Anne L. Mactavish". Archived from the original on 2011-07-19. Retrieved 2021-06-10.
  3. "Access to Justice for Canadians—Customized Procedures" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2019-07-09. Retrieved 2021-06-10.
  4. 1 2 "Orders In Council - Search". orders-in-council.canada.ca. Retrieved 2023-08-04.
  5. Note, Recent Case: Supreme Court of Canada Clarifies Standard of Review Framework , 132 Harv. L. Rev. 1772 (2019).

Access to Justice for Canadians—Customized Procedures