Demiraj v. BMO Financial Group

Demiraj v. BMO Financial Group

The CHRC reasonably adopted the investigator's conclusion that the dispute was contractual and that there was no evidence of discrimination based on national or ethnic origin; therefore further inquiry was not warranted and the judicial review application is dismissed as the CHRC decision falls within a range of defensible outcomes on the facts and law.

Citation
2017 FC 700
Parties
Applicant: Devis Demiraj; Respondent: BMO Financial Group
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review of CHRC Decision / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Discrimination in Provision of Services, Canadian Human Rights Act S.44(3)(b)(i), Standard of Review (reasonableness), Dismissal for No Inquiry Warranted, Costs and Travel/disbursement Adjustments
Source Language
English
Administrative Law Human Rights Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Discrimination in Provision of Services Canadian Human Rights Act S.44(3)(b)(i) Standard of Review (reasonableness) Dismissal for No Inquiry Warranted +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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Devis Demiraj

Applicant

BMO Financial Group

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review of CHRC Decision / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the CHRC reasonably dismissed the complaint under s.44(3)(b)(i) of the CHRA
  2. 2 Whether evidence established discrimination based on national or ethnic origin
  3. 3 Whether further inquiry by the CHRC was warranted

Ratio Decidendi

The CHRC reasonably adopted the investigator's conclusion that the dispute was contractual and that there was no evidence of discrimination based on national or ethnic origin; therefore further inquiry was not warranted and the judicial review application is dismissed as the CHRC decision falls within a range of defensible outcomes on the facts and law.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for judicial review dismissed
  • Costs to Respondent to be assessed according to Column III of Tariff B