C.D. v. Canadian Armed Forces

C.D. v. Canadian Armed Forces

Motion allowed in part: allegations of discrimination or harassment based on gender identity or expression that occurred on or before November 25, 2019 are barred by the FSA release and struck from the SOP; allegations regarding the Complainant's transfer to the Esquimalt Transition Unit and subsequent events up to and including her medical discharge fall outside the scope of the complaint and are struck; the incident on or about November 9, 2021 as considered by the Commission falls within scope; post-filing evidence may be admitted only to show ongoing effects for remedy purposes.

Citation
2025 CHRT 31
Parties
Complainant: C.D.; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Canadian Armed Forces
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 April 2025
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint Under the Canadian Human Rights Act / Ruling on Respondent's Motion to Dismiss/strike and Determination of Scope
Outcome
Respondent's motion to dismiss/strike allowed in part
Legal Topics
Gender Identity or Expression, Abuse of Process, Settlement Release, Scope of Complaint, Crown Liability
Source Language
English
Human Rights Law Administrative Law Contract Law Class Actions Gender Identity or Expression Abuse of Process Settlement Release Scope of Complaint +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 6 Authorities cited 14 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 Respondent's Motion to Dismiss/strike and Determination of Scope

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proceeding with allegations settled under the Final Settlement Agreement (FSA) would be an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether post-filing allegations regarding transfer to Esquimalt Transition Unit and subsequent events fall outside the scope of the complaint
  3. 3 Whether the Crown Liability and Proceedings Act section 9 bars the proceeding

Ratio Decidendi

Motion allowed in part: allegations of discrimination or harassment based on gender identity or expression that occurred on or before November 25, 2019 are barred by the FSA release and struck from the SOP; allegations regarding the Complainant's transfer to the Esquimalt Transition Unit and subsequent events up to and including her medical discharge fall outside the scope of the complaint and are struck; the incident on or about November 9, 2021 as considered by the Commission falls within scope; post-filing evidence may be admitted only to show ongoing effects for remedy purposes.

Court Disposition

Respondent's motion to dismiss/strike allowed in part

Orders

  • All allegations of discrimination or harassment based on gender identity or expression for events on or before November 25, 2019 are struck from the Complainant's Statement of Particulars
  • All allegations relating to the Complainant's transfer to the Esquimalt Transition Unit and all subsequent allegations up to and including the Complainant's medical discharge are struck from the Statement of Particulars as outside the scope of the complaint