Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Labour relations - Arbitration - Human rights - Discriminatory practices - Administrative law - Boards and tribunals - Jurisdiction - Judicial review - Whether the court of appeal erred in defining the scope, content and proper application of the test to be applied in determining competing jurisdiction between the Human Rights and Citizenship Commission and an arbitration board appointed to hear grievance containing allegations of discrimination in breach of the collective agreement - How are courts to assess jurisdictional disputes involving two competing statutory regimes, in this case a human rights body and a grievance arbitration board - Whether the existence of appellate authority which fundamentally misconstrues the content of the test and undermines its efficacy raises an important question of national significance which ought to be resolved by the Supreme Court.

After an employee was terminated from her employment with the Applicant, her union filed a grievance alleging the CHR “acted in bad faith” and “misapplied, misinterpreted and violated the Collective Agreement”. It also alleges the violation of several articles of the collective agreement, including Article 6, which prohibits discrimination. At a later date, the employee filed a human rights complaint with the Respondent Commission alleging discriminatory practices by the CHR. On August 27, 2004, following submissions on the issue, the Commission advised the parties that it would assume jurisdiction and proceed with the complaint process. On September 30, 2004, the CHR filed an application for judicial review in the Court of Queen’s Bench, seeking an order of prohibition to prohibit the Commission from proceeding with the human rights complaint on the ground that exclusive jurisdiction over the subject matter of the complaint lies with the arbitration board. In the meantime, the termination grievance proceeded to arbitration. The Arbitrator ruled that the two tribunals have concurrent jurisdiction over the dispute. The Arbitrator held that the arbitration board should hear the grievance, including the allegations of discrimination.