Parent v. Canadian Forces

Parent v. Canadian Forces

Bifurcation denied because the anticipated testimony of witnesses overlaps liability and remedy issues and, pursuant to s.48.9(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, further delay is unwarranted given the age of the complaint; therefore all issues including remedy will be heard together.

Citation
2007 CHRT 14
Parties
Complainant: Alain Parent; Respondent: Canadian Forces
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Tribunal Complaint / Pre Hearing Bifurcation Ruling
Outcome
Bifurcation refused; all issues to be heard together.
Legal Topics
Bifurcation, Remedies, Discrimination, Procedural Fairness, Expeditiousness
Source Language
English
Human Rights Administrative Law Employment Law Bifurcation Remedies Discrimination Procedural Fairness Expeditiousness

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alain Parent

Complainant

Canadian Forces

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Tribunal Complaint / Pre Hearing Bifurcation Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the hearing should be bifurcated into liability and remedy phases
  2. 2 Whether bifurcation would cause unnecessary delay or duplicate evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Bifurcation denied because the anticipated testimony of witnesses overlaps liability and remedy issues and, pursuant to s.48.9(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, further delay is unwarranted given the age of the complaint; therefore all issues including remedy will be heard together.

Court Disposition

Bifurcation refused; all issues to be heard together.

Orders

  • Case not bifurcated
  • All issues including remedy to be adjudicated at the hearing commencing May 28, 2007