Canada Case Law

Nanaimo (City) v. Mema

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Tribunal's finding that race and colour were factors in the City's decisions to suspend and terminate Mema was reasonable and supported by the evidentiary record; the chambers judge correctly dismissed the petition for judicial review and this Court will dismiss the appeal, deferring to the Tribunal's factual inferences and concluding any minor factual error was not material to the result.

Source excerpt

• Racial discrimination
• Judicial review
• Standard of review
• Causation in discrimination claims
• Reliance on third‑party complaints

Read case analysis

Mayers v. Correctional Service Canada

Court

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

The Tribunal granted Correctional Service Canada’s motion to strike portions of Ron Mayers’ pleadings as outside the scope of the complaint referred by the Commission.

• Racial discrimination
• Harassment
• Retaliation
• Scope of complaint
• Jurisdiction
• Motions to strike

Read case analysis

Cain v. Correctional Service of Canada

Court

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

The Tribunal partly granted a motion to strike and for particulars, removed some SOP paragraphs, allowed a conditional harassment amendment, and ordered further particulars.

• Racial discrimination
• Harassment
• Scope of complaint
• Particulars
• Remedies under section 53
• Amendment of complaint

Read case analysis

Mina v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

Court

Federal Court

Judicial review granted where the RAD unreasonably failed to address submissions on police violence and racial discrimination and applied the IFA test too narrowly.

• Internal flight alternative
• Reasonableness review (vavilov)
• Best interests of the child
• Racial discrimination
• Judicial review
• Evidentiary burden

Read case analysis

Pires Alberto Sibingo v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court found the RAD’s decision unreasonable for failing to address key evidence and arguments about racial discrimination and state protection in Portugal.

• State protection
• Reasonableness review
• Domestic violence
• Racial discrimination
• Remittance
• Judicial-review

Read case analysis

Nanaimo (City of) v. Mema

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed the City of Nanaimo’s judicial review of a human rights decision finding that racial bias was a factor in Mr. Mema’s termination.

• Racial discrimination
• Judicial review
• Standard of review
• Inference of discrimination
• Procedural fairness
• Termination for cause

Read case analysis

Brice Tembo v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a Refugee Appeal Division decision, finding no basis to reweigh evidence and no error in the internal flight alternative analysis.

• Internal flight alternative
• Persecution
• Racial discrimination
• Standard of review
• Evidentiary weight
• Judicial-review

Read case analysis

A.B. v. Canada

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court certified a class action by CAF members alleging racial discrimination and harassment and approved a $150 million settlement with systemic relief.

• Systemic negligence
• Racial discrimination
• Racial harassment
• Vicarious liability
• Settlement approval
• Monetary assessment scheme

Read case analysis

Kebede v. Toronto-Dominion Bank

Court

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

On the balance of probabilities the complainant failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination or harassment: credible TD evidence and witnesses demonstrated policies, prompt corrective responses to corroborated incidents, business-wide explanations for training and access problems, lack of proof of differential treatment linked to protected grounds, and insufficient evidence that TD knew or ought to have known of a disabling condition requiring accommodation; complaint therefore dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Discrimination
• Harassment
• Accommodation
• Workplace investigation
• Termination
• Performance appraisal

Read case analysis

Richards v. Correctional Service Canada

Court

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

The Tribunal requires more detailed will-say statements for the two objected-to witnesses (Ferrier and Williams) identifying specific events, names, locations and timeframes and requires the Commission to disclose any additional lines of questioning it intends to pursue; failure to comply may preclude examination at the hearing.

Source excerpt

• Witness disclosure
• Systemic discrimination
• Racial discrimination
• Religion
• Retaliation
• Sexual harassment

Read case analysis