HUMAN RIGHTS |
Canadian National Railways v. Leger
T-1547-99
Hansen J.
22/2/00
14 pp.
Motion for stay of proceedings, prohibiting CHRT from inquiring into discrimination complaint filed by respondent--Applicant asking inquiry be stayed until Court has ruled on CN's pending application for judicial review of Canadian Human Rights Commission's (Commission) decision to request inquiry--Respondent had first alleged discrimination on basis of mental disability (depression and anxiety) after CN refused his application for disability pension, saying respondent could not receive both pension and $75,000 severance package--Commission declined to request inquiry, finding, on evidence, allegation of discrimination unfounded--Respondent filed second complaint, alleging discrimination on basis of disability (mental illness) in form of harassment, failure to accommodate, and forced resignation--Commission decided to request tribunal inquiry into complaint--Motion for stay dismissed--Test for stay: serious issue; irreparable harm; balance of convenience--Serious issue--CN's reliance on CHRA, s. 41(1)(e) for arguing statutory time bar unfounded, given Commission's considerable discretion to extend time for filing complaints--Although some doubt as to applicability of res judicata herein, in view of dismissal of first complaint before adjudication stage and differences in content of complaint, serious issue to be considered--Overall delay of approximately 6 years raising serious issue--Irreparable harm--Issue of possible violation of right to be heard within reasonable time, given unavailability of evidence, can be examined by CHRT at inquiry--Potential evidentiary difficulties therefore not constituting irreparable harm--Demands of litigation, including inconvenience to parties and witnesses, stress and inability to recover costs not sufficient to meet irreparable harm branch of test where incurred in ordinary course of litigation--Argument based on CN's possible success on judicial review application unfounded as applicant assuming favourable decision on judicial review--In any event, even assuming successful issue for applicant, participation in inquiry inconvenience, not irreparable harm--Balance of convenience--Public interest militating against causing further delay in hearing of complaint--Applicant has not established would suffer irreparable harm if inquiry proceeds, or that such harm outweighing that which would be suffered by respondent if stay granted--Canadian Human Rights Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. H-6, s. 41(1)(e) (as am. by S.C. 1995, c. 44, s. 49).