Benji v. Correctional Service Canada

Benji v. Correctional Service Canada

The addendum allegations are dismissed because they do not have a reasonable factual nexus to the Commission's referral limited to alleged inadequate healthcare between June 2018 and December 2019; permitting them would exceed the Tribunal's jurisdiction and, applying the principle of proportionality, would unduly expand, complicate and prejudice the inquiry.

Citation
2025 CHRT 65
Parties
Complainant: Rajinder Benji; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Correctional Service of Canada
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint (commission Referral) / Motion to Amend Statement of Particulars — Ruling
Outcome
Motion to amend Statement of Particulars dismissed
Legal Topics
Amendment of Statement of Particulars, Jurisdiction and Nexus to Referral, Proportionality of Procedural Scope, Retaliation Allegations, Healthcare in Custody, Accommodation for Disability
Source Language
English
Human Rights Administrative Law Corrections/prison Law Disability Law Amendment of Statement of Particulars Jurisdiction and Nexus to Referral Proportionality of Procedural Scope Retaliation Allegations +2 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 8 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rajinder Benji

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Correctional Service of Canada

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint (commission Referral) / Motion to Amend Statement of Particulars — Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Statement of Particulars should be amended to include the addendum allegations
  2. 2 Whether the new allegations have a reasonable factual nexus to the complaint referred by the Commission
  3. 3 Whether permitting the amendments would exceed the Tribunal's jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

The addendum allegations are dismissed because they do not have a reasonable factual nexus to the Commission's referral limited to alleged inadequate healthcare between June 2018 and December 2019; permitting them would exceed the Tribunal's jurisdiction and, applying the principle of proportionality, would unduly expand, complicate and prejudice the inquiry.

Court Disposition

Motion to amend Statement of Particulars dismissed

Orders

  • Requested amendments to the Statement of Particulars are not allowed and the addendum is rejected
  • No further filings on this motion will be considered beyond the documents already reviewed