Warman v. Marc Lemire

Warman v. Marc Lemire

The application to intervene was denied because it was filed extremely late in the hearing process (after over five weeks of evidence and approaching final oral submissions), raising the same concerns of prejudice and disruption previously found sufficient to deny late interventions; the BCCLA may share arguments with existing parties but cannot be admitted as an interested party at this stage.

Citation
2008 CHRT 22
Parties
Complainant: Richard Warman; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Marc Lemire; Attorney General of Canada: 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
9 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Challenge Under the Canadian Human Rights Act / Interim Ruling on Application for Leave to Intervene During Hearing (pre Final Oral Submissions)
Outcome
Application to intervene denied
Legal Topics
Section 13 Canadian Human Rights Act, Section 54 Canadian Human Rights Act, Intervenor Status, Leave to Intervene, Procedural Fairness, Timeliness of Motions
Source Language
English
Human Rights Constitutional Law Administrative Law Freedom of Expression Section 13 Canadian Human Rights Act Section 54 Canadian Human Rights Act Intervenor Status Leave to Intervene +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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Warman

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Marc Lemire

Respondent

Attorney General of Canada

Attorney General of Canada

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

Constitutional Challenge Under the Canadian Human Rights Act / Interim Ruling on Application for Leave to Intervene During Hearing (pre Final Oral Submissions)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association should be granted interested party/intervenor status at a late stage of the hearing
  2. 2 Whether granting late intervention would prejudice the parties or the integrity of the hearing process
  3. 3 Interpretation and constitutionality of ss. 13 and 54 of the Canadian Human Rights Act (contextual)

Ratio Decidendi

The application to intervene was denied because it was filed extremely late in the hearing process (after over five weeks of evidence and approaching final oral submissions), raising the same concerns of prejudice and disruption previously found sufficient to deny late interventions; the BCCLA may share arguments with existing parties but cannot be admitted as an interested party at this stage.

Court Disposition

Application to intervene denied

Orders

  • British Columbia Civil Liberties Association's request for interested party status denied