Leung v.Canada Revenue Agency

Leung v.Canada Revenue Agency

The respondent's motion was dismissed because under Halifax SCC the Commission's prior dismissal or referral decisions are administrative and do not bar adjudication by the Tribunal; the Complainant's Statement of Particulars met procedural requirements and facts from related complaints A and C are relevant to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2012 CHRT 7
Parties
Complainant: Stephen Leung; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Canada Revenue Agency
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint Under the Canadian Human Rights Act / Interim Ruling on Respondent's Motion
Outcome
Respondent's motion dismissed in its entirety
Legal Topics
Retaliation, Discrimination, Jurisdiction of Administrative Bodies, Res Judicata and Issue Estoppel, Procedural Motions and Disclosure
Source Language
english
Human Rights Law Employment Law Administrative Law Retaliation Discrimination Jurisdiction of Administrative Bodies Res Judicata and Issue Estoppel Procedural Motions and Disclosure

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Leung

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Canada Revenue Agency

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint Under the Canadian Human Rights Act / Interim Ruling on Respondent's Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal should strike or limit the Complainant's Statement of Particulars
  2. 2 Whether issues previously investigated and dismissed by the Commission are barred by res judicata or issue estoppel
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal should limit its inquiry to retaliation relating to the 2002 FI-04 competition

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent's motion was dismissed because under Halifax SCC the Commission's prior dismissal or referral decisions are administrative and do not bar adjudication by the Tribunal; the Complainant's Statement of Particulars met procedural requirements and facts from related complaints A and C are relevant to Complaint B's retaliation allegation; the affidavit relied on by the respondent was found unreliable and unpersuasive.

Court Disposition

Respondent's motion dismissed in its entirety

Orders

  • Respondent's motion to strike the Complainant's Statement of Particulars denied
  • Respondent's alternative request to limit the Tribunal inquiry to retaliation solely regarding the 2002 FI-04 competition denied