Warman v. Marc Lemire

Warman v. Marc Lemire

The Tribunal ordered the Commission to produce unredacted copies of the disputed documents for Tribunal review by May 20, 2008 to determine arguable relevance; if material is arguably relevant the Commission must make privilege submissions under Rule 6(e); the Tribunal declined to order disclosure of materials subject to s.37 protection because s.37 objections must be resolved in the Federal Court.

Citation
2008 CHRT 16
Parties
Complainant: Richard Warman; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Marc Lemire; Interested Party: Attorney General of Canada; Interested Party: Canadian Association for Free Expression; Interested Party: Canadian Free Speech League; Interested Party: Canadian Jewish Congress; Interested Party: Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center for Holocaust Studies; Interested Party: League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Canadian Human Rights Tribunal / Interim Ruling (disclosure)
Outcome
Commission ordered to provide unredacted copies of the redacted documents to the Tribunal by May 20, 2008 for Tribunal review; Tribunal will determine arguable relevance and, if satisfied, require the Commission to make privilege submissions; no order for disclosure of materials claimed under s.37 of the Canada...
Legal Topics
Disclosure, Privilege (s.37 Canada Evidence Act), Oakes Proportionality Test, Document Redaction, Procedural Orders
Source Language
English
Human Rights Law Administrative Law Evidence Law Constitutional Law Privacy Law Disclosure Privilege (s.37 Canada Evidence Act) Oakes Proportionality Test +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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Warman

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Marc Lemire

Respondent

Attorney General of Canada

Interested Party

Canadian Association for Free Expression

Interested Party

Canadian Free Speech League

Interested Party

Canadian Jewish Congress

Interested Party

Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center for Holocaust Studies

Interested Party

League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Canadian Human Rights Tribunal / Interim Ruling (disclosure)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether redacted personal information (names, contact details, physical descriptors) is arguably relevant to issues in the case under the Oakes proportionality test and thus subject to Tribunal disclosure
  2. 2 Whether the Commission’s claim of privilege under s.37 of the Canada Evidence Act prohibits Tribunal-ordered disclosure or must be decided by the Federal Court
  3. 3 Whether the Commission must produce unredacted documents for Tribunal review and the procedure for resolving privilege objections

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal ordered the Commission to produce unredacted copies of the disputed documents for Tribunal review by May 20, 2008 to determine arguable relevance; if material is arguably relevant the Commission must make privilege submissions under Rule 6(e); the Tribunal declined to order disclosure of materials subject to s.37 protection because s.37 objections must be resolved in the Federal Court.

Court Disposition

Commission ordered to provide unredacted copies of the redacted documents to the Tribunal by May 20, 2008 for Tribunal review; Tribunal will determine arguable relevance and, if satisfied, require the Commission to make privilege submissions; no order for disclosure of materials claimed under s.37 of the Canada...

Orders

  • Commission to provide unredacted copies of the redacted documents to the Tribunal by May 20, 2008
  • Tribunal to review unredacted documents and identify any redacted material that is arguably relevant