Today

Wednesday: What’s Hot on CanLII

Each Wednesday we tell you which three English-language cases and which French-language case have been the most viewed* on CanLII and we give you a small sense of what the cases are about.

For this last week:

1. Northern Regional Health Authority v. Horrocks, 2021 SCC 42

[1] Labour relations legislation across Canada requires every collective agreement to include a clause providing for the final settlement of all differences concerning the interpretation, application or alleged violation of the agreement, by arbitration or otherwise. The precedents of this Court have maintained that the jurisdiction conferred upon the decision‑maker appointed thereunder is exclusive. At issue in this case, principally, is whether that exclusive jurisdiction held by labour arbitrators in Manitoba extends to adjudicating claims of discrimination that, while falling within the scope of the collective agreement, might also support a human rights complaint.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

2. Ward v. Quebec (Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse), 2021 SCC 43

[1] This appeal concerns the legal framework that applies to a discrimination claim involving a public figure’s right to the safeguard of his dignity, on the one hand, and a professional comedian’s freedom of expression, on the other. It invites us, incidentally, to clarify the scope of the jurisdiction of the Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse (“Commission”) and the Human Rights Tribunal (“Tribunal”) with respect to discrimination claims based on the Charter of human rights and freedoms, CQLR, c. C‑12 (“Charter” or “Quebec Charter”).

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

3. Blake v. University Health Network, 2021 ONSC 7081

[3] The moving party seeks injunctive relief on behalf of all similarly situate employees of University Health Network being those at risk of termination for their refusal to accept the Covid vaccine. The Notice of Action, on the other hand, is made on behalf of precisely six employees (of the approximately 180 that I am advised remain in the camp of employees refusing the vaccine). I am further advised that the plaintiffs’ counsel has a list of nineteen other employees who were in the process of retaining him when this motion was launched and have not yet been able to complete that process.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

The most-consulted French-language decision was Ward c. Québec (Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse), 2021 CSC 43

[1] Le présent pourvoi porte sur le cadre juridique applicable à un recours en discrimination qui met en cause le droit à la sauvegarde de la dignité d’une personnalité publique, d’une part, et la liberté d’expression d’un humoriste professionnel, d’autre part. Il nous invite, de façon incidente, à préciser l’étendue de la compétence de la Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse (« Commission ») et du Tribunal des droits de la personne (« Tribunal ») en matière de recours en discrimination fondés sur la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne, RLRQ, c. C‑12 (« Charte » ou « Charte québécoise »).

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

* As of January 2014 we measure the total amount of time spent on the pages rather than simply the number of hits; as well, a case once mentioned won’t appear again for three months.

Start the discussion!

Leave a Reply

(Your email address will not be published or distributed)