Khouri and Khouri v. Virgin Mobile Canada

Khouri and Khouri v. Virgin Mobile Canada

The Tribunal held that the Commission's revised categories of documents are arguably relevant to the broad accessibility issues pleaded and to potential remedies; accordingly Virgin Mobile must produce the specified categories (account notes, call audio/notes, App accessibility documentation and testing, ASC history and communications including special exemption list details, documents regarding Andrea Roworth's involvement, undue hardship evidence, and promotional texts) subject to privilege assertions, redactions for irrelevant third-party or proprietary information, and confidentiality protections; Virgin bears the burden to particularize privilege claims for Tribunal review.

Citation
2019 CHRT 26
Parties
Complainants: Roger Khouri & Francois Khouri; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Virgin Mobile Canada
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Canadian Human Rights Act Complaint / Ruling on Commission's Motion for Disclosure (pre Hearing)
Outcome
Motion granted in part; Order directing production of multiple categories of documents with conditions
Legal Topics
Disclosure/production, Arguable Relevance, Accommodation, Undue Hardship, Privilege (solicitor Client and Litigation), Accessibility of Mobile Apps and Communications, Remedies and Public Interest
Source Language
English
Human Rights Disability Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Technology Accessibility Disclosure/production Arguable Relevance Accommodation +4 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 6 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Roger Khouri & Francois Khouri

Complainants

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Virgin Mobile Canada

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Canadian Human Rights Act Complaint / Ruling on Commission's Motion for Disclosure (pre Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the requested documents are arguably relevant to facts, issues or remedies in the complaints
  2. 2 Scope of disclosure under Rule 6 and s.50(1) of the Act
  3. 3 Application and proof of solicitor-client and litigation privilege

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that the Commission's revised categories of documents are arguably relevant to the broad accessibility issues pleaded and to potential remedies; accordingly Virgin Mobile must produce the specified categories (account notes, call audio/notes, App accessibility documentation and testing, ASC history and communications including special exemption list details, documents regarding Andrea Roworth's involvement, undue hardship evidence, and promotional texts) subject to privilege assertions, redactions for irrelevant third-party or proprietary information, and confidentiality protections; Virgin bears the burden to particularize privilege claims for Tribunal review.

Court Disposition

Motion granted in part; Order directing production of multiple categories of documents with conditions

Orders

  • Respondent must immediately produce, in accessible format, all documents it agreed to produce in its response and the additional categories specified by the Tribunal (including accessible account statements; call notes and audio recordings of complainants' calls; guidance/policies on alternative format contracts;...
  • Respondent must produce all account notes related to aspects of the complainants' interactions where accessibility was an issue, including texts, website and Apps, 411 fees/credits, accessible contracts and statements; where relevance is unclear, notes may be provided to the Tribunal for determination.