Greaves v. Air Transat Inc.

Greaves v. Air Transat Inc.

The Commission's investigation was sufficiently thorough, neutral and procedurally fair: independent witnesses were interviewed, the applicant received the investigator's report and had opportunity to respond, and material regarding the applicant's disability (physician's letter) was before the Commission; there was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2009 FC 9
Parties
Applicant: Jocelyn Greaves; Respondent: Air Transat Inc.
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 January 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review of Canadian Human Rights Commission Decision / Final Judgment Denying Application
Outcome
Application for judicial review denied with costs
Legal Topics
Procedural Fairness, Investigation Adequacy, Bias/closed Mindedness, Accommodation for Disability, Standard of Judicial Review
Source Language
english
Administrative Law Human Rights Law Aviation Law Procedural Fairness Investigation Adequacy Bias/closed Mindedness Accommodation for Disability Standard of Judicial Review

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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jocelyn Greaves

Applicant

Air Transat Inc.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review of Canadian Human Rights Commission Decision / Final Judgment Denying Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commission's investigation met the requirements of procedural fairness
  2. 2 Whether the investigator was biased or 'closed‑minded' such that the decision was predetermined
  3. 3 Whether omissions in the investigation (failure to interview particular flight attendants or explore disability details) rendered the investigation clearly deficient

Ratio Decidendi

The Commission's investigation was sufficiently thorough, neutral and procedurally fair: independent witnesses were interviewed, the applicant received the investigator's report and had opportunity to respond, and material regarding the applicant's disability (physician's letter) was before the Commission; there was no objective basis to find the investigator biased or the investigation clearly deficient, therefore judicial review is denied.

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review denied with costs

Orders

  • Judicial review application dismissed; costs awarded to the respondent