Singh v. Canada Post Corp.

Singh v. Canada Post Corp. Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2002-04-26 Neutral citation 2002 FCA 155 File numbers A-557-00 Decision Content Date: 20020426 Docket: A-557-00 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 155 CORAM: ISAAC J.A. SEXTON J.A. MALONE J.A. BETWEEN: JAGIR SINGH Appellant and CANADA POST CORPORATION and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondents and CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Intervener Heard at Vancouver, British Columbia on April 24, 2002 Order delivered at Vancouver, British Columbia on April 26, 2002 REASONS FOR ORDER BY: MALONE J.A. Date: 20020426 Docket: A-557-00 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 155 CORAM: ISAAC J.A. SEXTON J.A. MALONE J.A. BETWEEN: JAGIR SINGH Appellant and CANADA POST CORPORATION and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondents and CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Intervener REASONS FOR JUDGMENT MALONE J.A. [1] This is an appeal from an order of a Motions Judge in the Trial Division dated June 19, 2000 which dismissed the appellant's application for judicial review of a decision of the Canadian Human Rights Commission ("the Commission"). Pursuant to subparagraph 44(3)(b)(i) the Commission dismissed the appellant's complaint that Canada Post had discriminated against him on the basis of race and national or ethnic origin. The Commission found that the allegations of discrimination were unfounded. [2] Judicial review of a section 44 decision by the Commission is onerous. As noted by this Court in Slattery v. Canada (Canadian Human Rights Commission) [1996] F.C.J. 385, the Commission's decision to dismiss a complaint is not to be reversed lightly. The Commission is primarily a fact-finder, and the decision to dismiss a complaint is well within their broad discretion. The Motions Judge recognized this and carefully undertook a review of Mr. Singh's arguments, and provided a rationale for rejecting each of them based on the record prepared and filed by the appellant. In essence, she found no basis to interfere with the Commission's exercise of its fact-finding expertise and its discretion to dismiss a complaint under section 44. [3] The appellant now complains that the record before the Motions Judge was incomplete. However, the burden was his to ensure that the Motions Judge had all the relevant material necessary to reach her decision, and he failed to discharge that burden. [4] Based on the record as presented, I am unable to discern any errors of fact or law in the judgment of the Motions Judge that would warrant the intervention of this Court. I endorse her conclusion when she wrote: The conclusion is inescapable that the applicant finds it difficult to accept responsibility for his inappropriate behaviour, and instead, the applicant alleges racial discrimination and conspiracy. [5] I would dismiss the appeal. (Sgd.) "B. Malone" J.A. (Sgd.) "J. Isaac" J.A. (Sgd.) "J. Edgar Sexton" J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-557-00 STYLE OF CAUSE:Jagir Singh v. Canada Post Corporation et al. PLACE OF HEARING: Vancouver BC DATE OF HEARING: April 24, 2002 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT : MALONE J.A. CONCURRED IN BY: ISAAC, SEXTON JJ.A. DATED: April 26, 2002 APPEARANCES: Jagir Singh FOR THE APPELLANT Craig T. Munroe FOR THE RESPONDENTS SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Jagir Singh FOR THE APPELLANT Abbotsford BC Farris, Vanghan, Wills & Murphy FOR THE RESPONDENTS