Articles 2019

Taking a look at the opportunity create a Supreme Court bench reflective of the diversity of modern Canada in light of upcoming vacancies at the nation's highest appellate court.

This case note identifies five significant implications of the recent decision in City of Abbotsford v. Shantz, in which the British Columbia Supreme Court found a Charter right to erect overnight shelters in public parks in Abbotsford, B.C.

The HRT addresses the application of the Code to short-term absences from employment to address childcare needs, affirming that such absences may be protected under the ground of family status.

“Carding” or “street checks” refers to the police practice of stopping individuals on the street and entering their personal information into a database. The OBA’s CCLHR and the Child & Youth Law Sections held a joint program as part of Institute 2016. “Constitutional and Human Rights of Young People: Policing & Public Space” explored the experiences and rights implications of racialized and homeless youth who navigate public space under increased police surveillance.

The landmark Carter v. Canada decision that struck down the constitutionality of Criminal Code provisions prohibiting physician-assisted suicide recently marked its one year anniversary. This article, as an update to a previous version on Rabble, takes a look at the legislative consultations and developments this case has spawned in the year since the ruling, as well as the challenge for the government in balancing the competing interests surrounding this issue.

In the close to two years since the release of Johnstone v. Attorney General of Canada (2014 FCA 110), there have now been a number of decisions, which have further clarified issues such as the scope of family status, the legal test for establishing prima facie discrimination on the basis of family status, and the evidentiary burden of potential claimants. This article surveys a few notable decisions which should be considered by human rights practitioners and interested observers.

Lawyers and interested professionals gathered recently at the offices of Norton Rose Fulbright LLP in Ottawa (and via Webcast in Toronto) to discuss pay equity law issues in the provincial and federal sectors.

A court may decline to hear constitutional issues raised for the first time on appeal or raised in the wrong way. While a court may exercise its discretion to overlook procedural missteps, it is risky to rely on such an exercise of discretion. It continues to be important to consider any potential constitutional arguments early on and identify the appropriate forum in which to raise them. Three recent cases illustrate the issue.

Case comment on Pereria v. Humber River Hospital (2015 HRTO 1340).