Dreaver, Fairbairn, Gingell, Irvine, Melenchuk, Ross, Watkinson, Weidenhammer and Willett v. Jim Pankiw

Dreaver, Fairbairn, Gingell, Irvine, Melenchuk, Ross, Watkinson, Weidenhammer and Willett v. Jim Pankiw

Householders mailed by an MP are political communications funded by the House of Commons that primarily benefit the sender and do not constitute 'services' under s.5 of the CHRA; the word 'representation' in s.12 does not encompass written political publications like Householders absent clear parliamentary language; because Householders are not services s.14 harassment provision does not apply; therefore the CHRA does not apply and the complaints are dismissed.

Citation
2009 CHRT 8
Parties
Complainant: Keith Dreaver; Complainant: Norma Fairbairn; Complainant: Susan Gingell; Complainant: Pamela Irvine; Complainant: John Melenchuk; Complainant: Richard Ross; Complainant: Ailsa Watkinson; Complainant: Harlan Weidenhammer; Complainant: Carman Willett; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Jim Pankiw; Interested Party: House of Commons
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint Under the Canadian Human Rights Act / Final Tribunal Decision (2009 03 06)
Outcome
Complaints dismissed
Legal Topics
Application of CHRA Ss.5, 12, 14, Political Communications by Members of Parliament, Discrimination on Race/colour/national or Ethnic Origin, Scope of 'services' and 'representation' Under Human Rights Statutes
Source Language
English
Human Rights Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Application of CHRA Ss.5,12,14 Political Communications by Members of Parliament Discrimination on Race/colour/national or Ethnic Origin Scope of 'services' and 'representation' Under Human Rights Statutes

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Keith Dreaver

Complainant

Norma Fairbairn

Complainant

Susan Gingell

Complainant

Pamela Irvine

Complainant

John Melenchuk

Complainant

Richard Ross

Complainant

Ailsa Watkinson

Complainant

Harlan Weidenhammer

Complainant

Carman Willett

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Jim Pankiw

Respondent

House of Commons

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint Under the Canadian Human Rights Act / Final Tribunal Decision (2009 03 06)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Householders mailed by an MP are 'services' under s.5 of the CHRA
  2. 2 Whether Householders are 'representations' under s.12 of the CHRA
  3. 3 Whether s.14 harassment provision applies given the characterization of Householders

Ratio Decidendi

Householders mailed by an MP are political communications funded by the House of Commons that primarily benefit the sender and do not constitute 'services' under s.5 of the CHRA; the word 'representation' in s.12 does not encompass written political publications like Householders absent clear parliamentary language; because Householders are not services s.14 harassment provision does not apply; therefore the CHRA does not apply and the complaints are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Complaints dismissed

Orders

  • Complaints dismissed; no remedy awarded