HUMAN RIGHTS |
Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Canadian Telephone Employees Assn.
T-1809-00
2002 FCT 776, Kelen J.
11/7/02
16 pp.
Judicial review of Canadian Human Rights Tribunal's denial of motion to amend two "pay equity" complaints-- Union filed three group complaints against Bell Canada, alleging sex discrimination in wages paid to employees in three groups of predominantly female employees, in comparison to employees in three comparable, predominantly male, classes of employees--Employer, unions initiating Joint Pay Equity Study--Study concluded patterns of disparity in compensation of Bell's unionized employees, indicating female-dominated jobs received less per hour than male-dominated jobs of equal value--When settlement attempts failed, complaints filed--Subsequently filed amendments to original complaints changing category of comparable predominantly male job class from specific job classes to job classes referred to in Final Report of Joint Study-- Commission produced three investigation reports, all referring to amended complaints--Reports included recommendation amended complaints be referred to Tribunal--Complaints referred to Tribunal by letters listing complaints, but only one complaint referred to as "as amended"--Tribunal subsequently dismissing Commission's motion for amended complaints to replace originals--Application allowed--(1) As Tribunal's decision based on question of law, standard of review correctness--(2) This interlocutory decision subject to review--Citizens' Mining Council of Newfoundland and Labrador Inc. v. Canada (Minister of the Environment) (1999), 17 Admin. L.R. (3d) 287 (F.C.T.D.) holding interlocutory decision subject to judicial review if defines scope of ultimate decision and of sufficient importance-- Amendments to complaints defining scope of Tribunal hearing, decision; of sufficient significance that applicant need not wait until Tribunal's decision to commence judicial review--Groupe G. Tremblay Syndics Inc. v. Canada (Superintendent of Bankruptcy), [1997] 2 F.C. 719 (T.D.) holding interlocutory decision having final effect on applicant's rights subject to judicial review--As complainants' right to have full, proper human rights complaints heard by Tribunal affected by interlocutory decision, this interlocutory ruling affecting parties' final rights, subject to judicial review--Additionally, Court will entertain applications for judicial review of interlocutory decision where Tribunal finding not having jurisdiction on matter affecting final rights of parties--Tribunal framed its decision denying amendments as matter of lacking jurisdiction --(3) Tribunal erred in failing to amend complaints in view of fact amended complaints subject of investigation, recommendations considered by Commission in decision to refer complaints to Tribunal--Also, F.C.A. noted in Bell Canada v. Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada, [1999] 1 F.C. 113 that Commission mistakenly omitted words "as amended" in reference to complaints-- Tribunal clearly has jurisdiction to amend at any time complaint to bring it into conformity with nature of proceedings before it: Central Okanagan School District No. 23 v. Renaud, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 970--Echoed in F.C. decisions with respect to amendment to pleadings under Federal Court Rules, 1998, r. 75--Moreover, since Commission can file amended complaints at any time, logical for Commission to seek leave to amend original complaints mistakenly filed-- Amendments occurred before complaints referred to Tribunal --Motion to amend attempt to correct obvious error, bring Tribunal proceedings in line with relevant evidence, not attempt to bring wholly new complaints into a proceeding already in progress--Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, r. 75.