Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

Canada ( Attorney General ) v. Liu

T-2500-93

Richard J.

9/11/94

7 pp.

Application to quash Canadian Human Rights Commission's decision to refer respondent Liu's complaint under Canadian Human Rights Act, ss. 7, 10 against National Research Council to Canadian Human Rights Tribunal for inquiry -- Complaint alleging discrimination in employment based on race, colour, national, ethnic origin -- Incidents cited in complaint beginning in 1985 -- In 1990 Commission deciding to exercise discretionary power to extend time limit within which complaint could be filed -- Decision preceded by Report Prior to Investigation recommending Commission deal with complaint pursuant to s. 41(e) even though act complained of occurred more than one year before receipt of complaint as alleged discrimination ongoing -- Although decision to extend time for filing complaint rendered in 1990, no judicial review application filed regarding that decision -- Applicant cannot, by seeking order to quash Commission's decision to appoint Tribunal pursuant to s. 44(3)(a), launch collateral attack on earlier decision extending time limit within which complaint could be filed -- No evidence Commission exercising discretion in arbitrary or capricious manner -- In considering complaint, investigation report, parties' submissions, Commission complied with rules of procedural fairness required in circumstances -- No evidence Commission investigating matters not raised in complaint -- Respondent requesting award of costs against NRC, since compelled to resist application with limited assistance from Commission, whose role before courts on judicial review now limited: Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Canada (Attorney General), [1994] 2 F.C. 447 (C.A.) -- R. 1618 providing no costs payable in respect of application for judicial review unless Court, for special reasons, so orders -- Mere success on application not special reason -- Rule limiting role of tribunal on application for judicial review of general application: Caimaw v. Paccar of Canada Ltd., [1989] 2 S.C.R. 983 -- No order as to costs -- Canadian Human Rights Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. H-6, ss. 7, 10, 41(e), 44(3)(a) (as am. by R.S.C., 1985 (1st Supp.), c-31, s. 64) -- Federal Court Rules, C.R.C., c. 663, R. 1618 (as enacted by SOR/92-43, s. 19).

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.