Date: 19991014
Docket: A-15-98
(T-2587-96)
Ottawa, Ontario, Thursday, the 14th day of October 1999.
Coram: DÉCARY J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
NOËL J.A.
Between:
JEAN BOUDREAULT
Appellant
- and -
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
JUDGMENT
The appeal is dismissed without costs.
Robert Décary
J.A.
Certified true translation
Monica F. Chamberlain
Date: 19991014
Docket: A-15-98
(T-2587-96)
Coram: DÉCARY J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
NOËL J.A.
Between:
JEAN BOUDREAULT
Appellant
- and -
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
Hearing held at Ottawa, Ontario, on Tuesday, October 12, 1999.
Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on Thursday, October 14, 1999.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: DÉCARY J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY: LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
NOËL J.A.
Date: 19991014
Docket: A-15-98
(T-2587-96)
Coram: DÉCARY J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
NOËL J.A.
Between:
JEAN BOUDREAULT
Appellant
- and -
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
DÉCARY J.A.
[1] The appellant filed a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission (the Commission) claiming that his employer had discriminated against him. He alleged that he had been harassed because of a prior alcohol dependency and a physical disability.
[2] The Commission designated an investigator to examine the complaint and submit a report, as set out in sections 43 and 44 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. H-6 (the Act). After receiving a particularly detailed investigation report and following the investigator"s recommendation, the Commission dismissed the complaint without first ordering the appointment of a human rights tribunal, which is expressly permitted in paragraph 44(3)(b ) of the Act.
[3] The appellant basically maintains that the investigation was not thorough and lacked depth, two defects that, according to the case law, can result in the reversal of the Commission"s decision.
[4] After examining the case, Nadon J. concluded as follows (Boudreault v. Canadian Human Rights Commission et al. (1997), 149 F.T.R. 100 at p. 107):
| [13] I am of the opinion that the errors raised by the applicant are not sufficient to warrant my intervention. As Strayer J.A. pointed out in Linton Roberts, the Commission can take into account many factors in making its decision, including the quality of the evidence before it. In other words, if the Commission is of the opinion that the evidence offered is not sufficient to justify appointing a human rights tribunal, it may dismiss the complaint. That is precisely what the Commission did in this instance. |
[5] I was unable to determine which error vitiated the trial judge"s decision from the appellant"s long representation. The Commission has considerable latitude in deciding whether the circumstances of a complaint justify referral to a human rights tribunal, which, of course, it must exercise by observing the rules of procedural fairness established in the case law, but also according to its resources and the insight it has developed over the years into whether a given case should proceed. The preliminary investigation must be serious; it does not have to be exhaustive. The investigator did not meet the 90 witnesses that the appellant wanted him to meet, but he was entitled to decide whether it was necessary to hear everyone. I note the appellant could not even demonstrate the relevance of this testimony to us.
[6] Nadon J. said that he believed that the defects alleged by the appellant were not serious enough to merit the Court"s intervention. He was able to conclude this from the face of the record.
[7] The appeal should be dismissed without costs under the circumstances.
Robert Décary
J.A.
I concur.
Gilles Létourneau, J.A.
I concur.
Marc Noël, J.A.
Certified true translation
Monica F. Chamberlain
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT FILE NO.: A-15-98
APPEAL FROM A JUDGMENT OF THE TRIAL DIVISION DATED DECEMBER 24, 1997. FILE NO. T-2587-96
STYLE OF CAUSE: Jean Boudreault v. Attorney
General of Canada
PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: October 12, 1999
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: Décary J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY: (Létourneau, Noël J.J.A.)
DATED: October 14, 1999
APPEARANCES:
Jean Boudreault himself (for the appellant)
Linda Wall for the respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Jean Boudreault himself (for the appellant)
Morris Rosenberg for the respondent
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, Ontario