Richards vs Correctional Service Canada

Richards vs Correctional Service Canada

The Tribunal dismissed the requests because prior rulings finding paper disclosure (two paper copies) to be a reasonable accommodation remain valid, the Commission failed to provide evidence of changed circumstances or actual prejudice or of reduced security risk from a read-only device, and there was no legal basis...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2025 CHRT 35
Parties
Complainant: Ryan Richards; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Correctional Service Canada
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 May 2025
Procedural Posture
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal / Pre Hearing Procedural Ruling; Virtual Hearing to Resume June 19, 2025
Outcome
All requests dismissed in part: Mr. Richards' and the Commission's requests for an order providing an in-cell laptop are dismissed; CSC's requests to declare the email privileged and to seal materials and prevent sharing are dismissed; the disputed email was not relied upon in the decision but its disclosure was...
Legal Topics
Accommodation, Procedural Fairness, Disclosure, Privilege (settlement), Sealing of Records, Access to Technology, Abuse of Process
Source Language
english
Human Rights Administrative Law Corrections Law Accommodation Procedural Fairness Disclosure Privilege (settlement) Sealing of Records +2 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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ryan Richards

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Correctional Service Canada

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal / Pre Hearing Procedural Ruling; Virtual Hearing to Resume June 19, 2025

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal should order CSC to provide an in-cell laptop to an incarcerated complainant
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal should revisit prior rulings denying provision of a laptop
  3. 3 Whether the January 19, 2024 email is protected by settlement privilege

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal dismissed the requests because prior rulings finding paper disclosure (two paper copies) to be a reasonable accommodation remain valid, the Commission failed to provide evidence of changed circumstances or actual prejudice or of reduced security risk from a read-only device, and there was no legal basis presented to seal materials or to compel non-disclosure of documents already in parties' possession.

Court Disposition

All requests dismissed in part: Mr. Richards' and the Commission's requests for an order providing an in-cell laptop are dismissed; CSC's requests to declare the email privileged and to seal materials and prevent sharing are dismissed; the disputed email was not relied upon in the decision but its disclosure was...

Orders

  • The requests by Ryan Richards and the Commission for an order requiring CSC to provide a laptop for in-cell use are dismissed
  • CSC's requests to seal the Commission's motion materials and to order parties not to share documents outside the litigation are dismissed