Warman v. Marc Lemire

Warman v. Marc Lemire

The motion to dismiss was denied because the Commission and complainant expressly particularized that they consider the entirety of the freedomsite.org material to constitute s.13 hate messages (supplementing prior disclosure of 133 pages), which satisfies the particulars requirement; disclosure obligations are limited to documents in a party’s possession under Rule 6, Rule 9 remedies exist for late evidence, and arguments on whether the material in fact constitutes hate messages are merits issues for the hearing rather than for dismissal at this stage.

Citation
2006 CHRT 58
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
6 December 2006
Procedural Posture
Human Rights S.13 Canadian Human Rights Act / Interim Ruling on Motion to Dismiss (particulars and Disclosure)
Outcome
Motion to dismiss denied
Legal Topics
Hate Speech, S.13 Canadian Human Rights Act, Disclosure Obligations, Particulars, Motion to Dismiss
Source Language
English
Human Rights Administrative Law Freedom of Expression Civil Procedure Hate Speech S.13 Canadian Human Rights Act Disclosure Obligations Particulars +1 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 5 Authorities cited 6 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 S.13 Canadian Human Rights Act / Interim Ruling on Motion to Dismiss (particulars and Disclosure)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Statements of Particulars set out material facts sufficient to allow the respondent to give full answer and defence
  2. 2 Whether the Commission and complainant satisfied their disclosure obligations under Tribunal Rule 6
  3. 3 Whether reliance on the entirety of a website and other online materials without producing full copies impairs the respondent’s ability to defend

Ratio Decidendi

The motion to dismiss was denied because the Commission and complainant expressly particularized that they consider the entirety of the freedomsite.org material to constitute s.13 hate messages (supplementing prior disclosure of 133 pages), which satisfies the particulars requirement; disclosure obligations are limited to documents in a party’s possession under Rule 6, Rule 9 remedies exist for late evidence, and arguments on whether the material in fact constitutes hate messages are merits issues for the hearing rather than for dismissal at this stage.

Court Disposition

Motion to dismiss denied

Orders

  • Motion to dismiss denied.
  • The Canadian Human Rights Commission and Richard Warman must inform Marc Lemire which portions of the jrbooksonline literature they intend to specifically draw the Tribunal’s attention to at the hearing within one week following the viewing of the literature, as ordered in Warman v. Lemire, 2006 CHRT 53.