C.D. v. Canadian Armed Forces

C.D. v. Canadian Armed Forces

Applying s.52(1)(c) of the Act as informed by Sherman Estate, the Tribunal found the complainant's transgender status is sensitive personal information that, if disclosed, creates a real and substantial risk of undue hardship (including risk to dignity and personal safety); that risk constitutes a serious public interest; and the need to prevent disclosure (via anonymization using initials C.D.) outweighs the societal interest in an open hearing and is the least intrusive measure, therefore anonymization is ordered.

Citation
2025 CHRT 20
Parties
Complainant: C.D.; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Canadian Armed Forces
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 March 2025
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint Under the Canadian Human Rights Act / Ruling on Confidentiality/anonymization Motion (section 52)
Outcome
Motion granted; anonymization order granted
Legal Topics
Anonymization, Confidentiality Orders, Gender Identity or Expression, Section 52 Canadian Human Rights Act, Public Interest in Open Hearings
Source Language
English
Human Rights Law Administrative Law Privacy Law Anonymization Confidentiality Orders Gender Identity or Expression Section 52 Canadian Human Rights Act Public Interest in Open Hearings

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

Parties

C.D.

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Canadian Armed Forces

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint Under the Canadian Human Rights Act / Ruling on Confidentiality/anonymization Motion (section 52)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether anonymization of the complainant should be ordered under s.52(1)(c) of the Canadian Human Rights Act
  2. 2 Whether disclosure of the complainant's transgender status poses a real and substantial risk of undue hardship
  3. 3 Whether the need to prevent disclosure outweighs the societal interest in a public hearing

Ratio Decidendi

Applying s.52(1)(c) of the Act as informed by Sherman Estate, the Tribunal found the complainant's transgender status is sensitive personal information that, if disclosed, creates a real and substantial risk of undue hardship (including risk to dignity and personal safety); that risk constitutes a serious public interest; and the need to prevent disclosure (via anonymization using initials C.D.) outweighs the societal interest in an open hearing and is the least intrusive measure, therefore anonymization is ordered.

Court Disposition

Motion granted; anonymization order granted

Orders

  • Complainant must be referred to as C.D. in all written materials, oral submissions, and Tribunal rulings and decisions
  • Within 30 days of the ruling, each party must refile anonymized versions of previously filed documents replacing the complainant's name with the initials C.D.