 | This article possibly contains original research .(January 2008) |
Stopps v Just Ladies Fitness (Metrotown) Ltd was a discrimination by sex case heard before the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal that was significant in Canadian law because it found that a women-only admission policy of a public gym was not discrimination.
On October 2, 2004, Vancouver resident Ralph Stopps applied to the Just Ladies Fitness facility in Metrotown and was denied membership because he is male. Stopps filed a complaint with the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal on November 21, 2006 that he was discriminated against because of his gender, violating s. 8 of the "Human Rights Code," which prohibits discrimination by sex. The tribunal, a panel of 9 females and 3 males, rendered its decision that the complainant had not established that he was discriminated against.
Just Ladies Fitness is a women-only fitness facility, although some men work there in management and maintenance. It was argued at the tribunal that women attend the facility because they feel demeaned by men gazing at them at unisex facilities. The facility also claimed that because it is cleaner, has smaller weights that are more suitable for females, and because it has prenatal fitness classes its women-only admission policy was justified. The managers argued that women pay higher fees at their facility than at other fitness facilities and that this proves that some females feel that going to a female only fitness facility is necessary, but does not constitute sexual discrimination.
The Human Rights Tribunal ruled that the complainant had failed to prove on a balance of probabilities all the elements required to demonstrate that illegal discrimination had happened. Stopps still has the right to appeal the BCHRT's decision.
Firstly, the tribunal found that the complainant was not adversely affected by the denial of membership. His claim that the facility was nearer his home was incorrect, his claim that the free initial membership period was not significant and since he had not pursued other opportunities to join other gyms, the tribunal found he had no serious intention of working out at a facility, as he had never gone to any fitness facilities before, and did not attend any after he was denied membership at "Just Ladies Fitness".
Second, the tribunal found that the complainant failed to prove that his dignity has been adversely affected by his denial of membership. In British Columbia, one cannot receive compensation for being discriminated against unless one also proves that the discrimination demeaned their dignity, and Mr. Stopps failed to prove that his dignity had been significantly demeaned.
Third, the tribunal found that its purpose is to provide compensation for those who have actually suffered from being discriminated against, and that the tribunal should not be used to make a political point. The tribunal found that Stopps's claim was politically motivated, and filing such claims harms those who file legitimate claims of discrimination, including men who have been discriminated against and whose dignity has been demeaned.
Sexism is prejudice or discrimination based on one's sex or gender. Sexism can affect anyone, but primarily affects women and girls. It has been linked to gender roles and stereotypes, and may include the belief that one sex or gender is intrinsically superior to another. Extreme sexism may foster sexual harassment, rape, and other forms of sexual violence. Discrimination in this context is defined as discrimination toward people based on their gender identity or their gender or sex differences. An example of this is workplace inequality. Sexism refers to violation of equal opportunities based on gender or refers to violation of equality of outcomes based on gender, also called substantive equality. Sexism may arise from social or cultural customs and norms.
Sexual harassment is a type of harassment involving the use of explicit or implicit sexual overtones, including the unwelcome and inappropriate promises of rewards in exchange for sexual favors. Sexual harassment can be physical and/or a demand or request for sexual favors, making sexually colored remarks, showing pornography, and any other unwelcome physical, verbal, or non-verbal conduct of a sexual nature. Sexual harassment includes a range of actions from verbal transgressions to sexual abuse or assault. Harassment can occur in many different social settings such as the workplace, the home, school, or religious institutions. Harassers or victims can be of any gender.
The Canadian Human Rights Act is a statute passed by the Parliament of Canada in 1977 with the express goal of extending the law to ensure equal opportunity to individuals who may be victims of discriminatory practices based on a set of prohibited grounds.
The Human Rights Code is a statute in the Canadian province of Ontario that guarantees equality before the law and prohibits discrimination in specific social areas such as housing or employment. The code's goal specifically prohibits discrimination based on race, colour, gender identity or expression, sex, sexual orientation, disability, creed, age and other grounds. The code is administered by the Ontario Human Rights Commission and enforced by the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.
Employment discrimination is a form of illegal discrimination in the workplace based on legally protected characteristics. In the U.S., federal anti-discrimination law prohibits discrimination by employers against employees based on age, race, gender, sex, religion, national origin, and physical or mental disability. State and local laws often protect additional characteristics such as marital status, veteran status and caregiver/familial status. Earnings differentials or occupational differentiation—where differences in pay come from differences in qualifications or responsibilities—should not be confused with employment discrimination. Discrimination can be intended and involve disparate treatment of a group or be unintended, yet create disparate impact for a group.
Law v Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1999] 1 SCR 497 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The ruling is notable because the court created the Law test, a significant new tool that has since been used by Canadian courts for determining the validity of equality rights claims under section 15. However, the Law test has since been discredited by the Supreme Court.
A ladies' night is a promotional event, often at a bar or nightclub, where female patrons pay less than male patrons for the cover charge or alcoholic beverages. In the United States, state courts in California, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin have ruled that ladies' night discounts are unlawful gender-based price discrimination under state or local statutes. However, courts in Illinois, Minnesota, and Washington have rejected a variety of challenges to such discounts.
United Kingdom employment equality law is a body of law which legislates against prejudice-based actions in the workplace. As an integral part of UK labour law it is unlawful to discriminate against a person because they have one of the "protected characteristics", which are, age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, race, religion or belief, sex, pregnancy and maternity, and sexual orientation. The primary legislation is the Equality Act 2010, which outlaws discrimination in access to education, public services, private goods and services, transport or premises in addition to employment. This follows three major European Union Directives, and is supplement by other Acts like the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. Furthermore, discrimination on the grounds of work status, as a part-time worker, fixed term employee, agency worker or union membership is banned as a result of a combination of statutory instruments and the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, again following European law. Disputes are typically resolved in the workplace in consultation with an employer or trade union, or with advice from a solicitor, ACAS or the Citizens Advice Bureau a claim may be brought in an employment tribunal. The Equality Act 2006 established the Equality and Human Rights Commission, a body designed to strengthen enforcement of equality laws.
Smith v Knights of Columbus was a Canadian human rights case which upheld the right of a Christian group to ban celebrations of same sex marriages in their rental facility. The case was decided by the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal on November 29, 2005 and is cited as 2005 BCHRT 544.
Human rights complaints against Maclean's magazine were filed in December 2007 by Mohamed Elmasry of the Canadian Islamic Congress with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal and the Ontario Human Rights Commission. Maclean's magazine was accused of publishing eighteen Islamophobic articles between January 2005 and July 2007. The articles in question included a column by Mark Steyn titled "The Future Belongs to Islam", an excerpt from a book written by Steyn.
The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal is a quasi-judicial human rights body in British Columbia, Canada. It was established under British Columbia's Human Rights Code. It is responsible for "accepting, screening, mediating and adjudicating human rights complaints."
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.
Women currently make up 14.8% of the Canadian Armed Forces, and are eligible to serve in all occupational specialties. The last occupational ban for females in the military was in 2001. In February 2018 the total representation of women who served in combat arms was reported as 4.3%. No women currently serve in combat specialties within special operations forces. Females who obtain officer status are mainly concentrated in the personnel and nursing fields.
P v S and Cornwall County Council was a landmark case of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) which extended the scope of sex equality to discrimination against transsexuals.
Kimberly Nixon is a transgender woman who filed a human rights complaint against Vancouver Rape Relief & Women's Shelter Society (VRRS) for discrimination. VRRS argued that Nixon, a transgender woman, did not have the same life experiences as a woman who was assigned female at birth, and could not volunteer as a peer rape counselor. She fought her case successively through the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal, the Supreme Court of British Columbia, the British Columbia Court of Appeal, each of which rejected her complaint, and then eventually the Supreme Court of Canada, which dismissed her request to appeal the decision against her case on February 1, 2007.
Jessica Simpson, commonly known by her former legal name, Jessica Yaniv, is a Canadian transgender activist in British Columbia who is best known for filing at least 15 complaints of discrimination on the basis of gender identity against various beauty salons after they refused to wax her male genitalia. The complaints were filed with the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal in 2018 and 2019. It was the first major case of alleged transgender discrimination in retail in Canada. In 2019, the Tribunal rejected her complaints and ruled Yaniv had racist motives. In following years, Yaniv has gone on to make additional complaints of discrimination, libel and privacy breach.
Forstater v Centre for Global Development Europe is a UK employment and discrimination case brought by Maya Forstater against the Center for Global Development (CGD). The Employment Appeal Tribunal decided that gender-critical views are capable of being protected as a belief under the Equality Act 2010. The tribunal further clarified that this finding does not mean that people with gender-critical beliefs can express them in a manner that discriminates against trans people.
Maya Forstater is a British business studies and international development researcher who was the claimant in Forstater v Centre for Global Development Europe. The case established that gender critical views are protected as a belief under the Equality Act 2010, while stating that the judgment does not permit misgendering transgender people with impunity. At a subsequent full merits hearing, the Employment Tribunal upheld Forstater's case, concluding that she had suffered direct discrimination on the basis of her gender critical beliefs. The judgement for remedies was handed down in June 2023, with Forstater awarded compensation of £91,500 for loss of earnings, injury to feelings and aggravated damages, with an additional £14,900 added as interest.
President of the Republic of South Africa and Another v Hugo is a 1997 decision of the Constitutional Court of South Africa. The court affirmed that the exercise of presidential prerogative powers is subject to judicial review, but it nonetheless found that President Nelson Mandela had acted fairly and lawfully in pardoning imprisoned mothers, but not imprisoned fathers, in a June 1994 presidential decree. The decision was among the first in the Constitutional Court's emerging jurisprudence on unfair discrimination and the right to equality.