Adair v. Canada (Canadian Armed Forces)

Adair v. Canada (Canadian Armed Forces)

The CAF policy requiring members to take retirement leave prior to September 3, 1992 removed them from active duty and deprived them of employment opportunities and other non‑monetary benefits, and therefore constituted a discriminatory practice contrary to ss.7(b) and 10 of the Canadian Human Rights Act;...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2004 CHRT 28
Parties
Complainants: Robert D. Adair, Barry Catley, Joseph T.B. Corrigan, Paul D. Cross, John Fraser, Arthur W. Guthreau, Barbarine Henry, Douglas Horsman, John Hurley, Joseph Edward Korponay; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Canadian Armed Forces
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 August 2004
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint / Liability Determination (compensation Deferred)
Outcome
Complaint upheld: CAF policy requiring retirement leave prior to September 3, 1992 declared discriminatory; entitlement to compensation recognized; quantum reserved.
Legal Topics
Age Discrimination, Compulsory Retirement, Retirement Leave, Retroactivity of Regulatory Amendments, Remedies and Compensation
Source Language
english
Human Rights Law Employment Law Administrative Law Military Law Age Discrimination Compulsory Retirement Retirement Leave Retroactivity of Regulatory Amendments +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert D. Adair, Barry Catley, Joseph T.B. Corrigan, Paul D. Cross, John Fraser, Arthur W. Guthreau, Barbarine Henry, Douglas Horsman, John Hurley, Joseph Edward Korponay

Complainants

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Canadian Armed Forces

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint / Liability Determination (compensation Deferred)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the requirement to take retirement leave prior to September 3, 1992 constituted a discriminatory practice contrary to ss.7(b) and 10 of the Canadian Human Rights Act
  2. 2 Whether the September 3, 1992 amendment to the Queen's Regulations and Orders operates retroactively to cure prior discriminatory practice

Ratio Decidendi

The CAF policy requiring members to take retirement leave prior to September 3, 1992 removed them from active duty and deprived them of employment opportunities and other non‑monetary benefits, and therefore constituted a discriminatory practice contrary to ss.7(b) and 10 of the Canadian Human Rights Act; complainants are entitled to claim compensation for that discrimination, with quantum to be determined later.

Court Disposition

Complaint upheld: CAF policy requiring retirement leave prior to September 3, 1992 declared discriminatory; entitlement to compensation recognized; quantum reserved.

Orders

  • Policy requiring retirement leave prior to September 3, 1992 declared discriminatory contrary to ss.7(b) and 10 of the Canadian Human Rights Act
  • Complainants entitled to claim compensation for the discriminatory practice; determination of amount and period of compensation deferred to a later proceeding