Saskatchewan (Human Rights Commission) v. Saskatoon (City)

Saskatchewan (Human Rights Commission) v. Saskatoon (City)

The Board's factual finding that Craig performed firefighting duties was supported by evidence and not reviewable absent no evidence; the Etobicoke test (subjective and objective elements of a bona fide occupational qualification applied reasonably in general) governs s.16(7) because the Regulations are non‑exclusive; employers need not individually test employees if impractical but must satisfactorily explain why individualized testing was not feasible; where employer satisfies s.16(7) there is no discrimination and therefore no union liability under s.18.

Citation
[1989] 2 SCR 1297
Parties
Appellant (employer): City of Saskatoon; Appellant (union): Saskatoon Professional Fire Fighters Union, Local 80; Respondent (human Rights Commission): Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission; Respondent (employee): Len Craig
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 December 1989
Procedural Posture
Administrative Law Appeal (human Rights) / Supreme Court of Canada Appeal From Saskatchewan Court of Appeal From Court of Queen's Bench Review of Board of Inquiry Decision
Outcome
Appeals allowed; Court of Appeal judgment set aside; judgment of Maher J. and Board of Inquiry decision restored; costs to appellants
Legal Topics
Age Discrimination, Mandatory Retirement, Reasonable Occupational Qualification, Bona Fide Occupational Qualification, Individualized Testing, Union Liability
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Labour Law Employment Law Administrative Law Age Discrimination Mandatory Retirement Reasonable Occupational Qualification +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

City of Saskatoon

Appellant (employer)

Saskatoon Professional Fire Fighters Union, Local 80

Appellant (union)

Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission

Respondent (human Rights Commission)

Len Craig

Respondent (employee)

Procedural Posture

Administrative Law Appeal (human Rights) / Supreme Court of Canada Appeal From Saskatchewan Court of Appeal From Court of Queen's Bench Review of Board of Inquiry Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Craig was a fire fighter for purposes of the Code
  2. 2 Meaning and scope of "reasonable occupational qualification and requirement" in s.16(7) of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code and its relation to Etobicoke
  3. 3 Whether individualized functional testing was required before applying an age-based occupational qualification

Ratio Decidendi

The Board's factual finding that Craig performed firefighting duties was supported by evidence and not reviewable absent no evidence; the Etobicoke test (subjective and objective elements of a bona fide occupational qualification applied reasonably in general) governs s.16(7) because the Regulations are non‑exclusive; employers need not individually test employees if impractical but must satisfactorily explain why individualized testing was not feasible; where employer satisfies s.16(7) there is no discrimination and therefore no union liability under s.18.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; Court of Appeal judgment set aside; judgment of Maher J. and Board of Inquiry decision restored; costs to appellants

Orders

  • Appeals allowed with costs both in the Supreme Court of Canada and Court of Appeal
  • Judgment of the Court of Appeal set aside