Bailie et al. v. Air Canada and Air Canada Pilots Association

Bailie et al. v. Air Canada and Air Canada Pilots Association

The motion is granted in part: complaints of pilots who reached age 60 on or before December 31, 2009 are dismissed as an abuse of process because the normal retirement age of 60 for that period was finally determined by prior Tribunal and Federal Court of Appeal decisions and no new evidence was shown to justify re-litigation; the motion is dismissed as to complainants who reached age 60 on or after January 1, 2010 and those complaints will proceed to hearing because there is no evidentiary record for the post-2009 period and fairness under s.50(1) CHRA requires they be heard.

Citation
2017 CHRT 22
Parties
Complainant: Bailie et al. (collective complainants); Complainant: William Clark; Complainant: Stephen Collier; Complainant: Robert McBride; Complainant: Eric Rogers; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Air Canada; Respondent: Air Canada Pilots Association
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Mandatory Retirement/age Discrimination / Pre Hearing Motion to Dismiss (ruling on Abuse of Process)
Outcome
Motion granted in part and dismissed in part: complaints of pilots who reached age 60 on or before December 31, 2009 dismissed; complaints of pilots who reached age 60 on or after January 1, 2010 proceed to hearing.
Legal Topics
Age Discrimination, Mandatory Retirement, Abuse of Process, Issue Estoppel, Judicial Review
Source Language
English
Human Rights Administrative Law Employment Law Constitutional Law Age Discrimination Mandatory Retirement Abuse of Process Issue Estoppel +1 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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bailie et al. (collective complainants)

Complainant

William Clark

Complainant

Stephen Collier

Complainant

Robert McBride

Complainant

Eric Rogers

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Air Canada

Respondent

Air Canada Pilots Association

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Mandatory Retirement/age Discrimination / Pre Hearing Motion to Dismiss (ruling on Abuse of Process)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether complaints alleging mandatory retirement at age 60 constitute an abuse of process by re-litigation
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal may dismiss complaints without a full hearing
  3. 3 Whether prior Federal Court of Appeal determinations on normal retirement age bind these complaints for the period considered

Ratio Decidendi

The motion is granted in part: complaints of pilots who reached age 60 on or before December 31, 2009 are dismissed as an abuse of process because the normal retirement age of 60 for that period was finally determined by prior Tribunal and Federal Court of Appeal decisions and no new evidence was shown to justify re-litigation; the motion is dismissed as to complainants who reached age 60 on or after January 1, 2010 and those complaints will proceed to hearing because there is no evidentiary record for the post-2009 period and fairness under s.50(1) CHRA requires they be heard.

Court Disposition

Motion granted in part and dismissed in part: complaints of pilots who reached age 60 on or before December 31, 2009 dismissed; complaints of pilots who reached age 60 on or after January 1, 2010 proceed to hearing.

Orders

  • Dismissed complaints of complainants who turned 60 on or before December 31, 2009.
  • Denied the motion to dismiss as to complainants who turned 60 on or after January 1, 2010 and ordered that those complaints proceed to hearing.