Warman v. Lemire

Warman v. Lemire

The recusal application was denied because CAFE failed to establish substantial grounds for a reasonable apprehension of bias: the only cited incident dated from 1997 and was remote in time, the member's involvement was with an umbrella community organization on matters unrelated to the issues in the complaint, and the member's procedural rulings and case management conduct did not amount to demonstrable partiality. Thus an informed person would not conclude there was a reasonable apprehension of bias.

Citation
2008 CHRT 29
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
26 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Canadian Human Rights Complaint Recusal Motion / Recusal Motion Ruling
Outcome
Recusal application denied
Legal Topics
Recusal, Reasonable Apprehension of Bias, Interested Party Status, Scheduling and Disclosure
Source Language
English

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
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

Canadian Human Rights Complaint Recusal Motion / Recusal Motion Ruling

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal member should be disqualified for reasonable apprehension of bias
  2. 2 Whether past association and a 1997 joint statement with the Canadian Jewish Congress establishes substantial grounds for bias
  3. 3 Whether procedural rulings and conduct during the hearing demonstrate partiality

Ratio Decidendi

The recusal application was denied because CAFE failed to establish substantial grounds for a reasonable apprehension of bias: the only cited incident dated from 1997 and was remote in time, the member's involvement was with an umbrella community organization on matters unrelated to the issues in the complaint, and the member's procedural rulings and case management conduct did not amount to demonstrable partiality. Thus an informed person would not conclude there was a reasonable apprehension of bias.

Court Disposition

Recusal application denied

Orders

  • CAFE's application for recusal is denied.