Wardair Canada Inc. v. Cremona
A-748-91
MacGuigan J.A.
9/10/92
8 pp.
S. 28 application to set aside decision of Canadian Human Rights Tribunal -- Whether factual foundation for conclusions drawn by Tribunal under Canadian Human Rights Act -- Airline found not to have discharged onus of proving minimum visual acuity standards bona fide occupational requirement under Act, s. 15(a) -- Whether Tribunal's finding failed to take account of "down time" for contact lens wearers -- Testimony of respondent's witness ambiguous on question at issue -- Tribunal rightly relying on decision of Supreme Court of Canada in Saskatchewan (Human Rights Commission) v. Saskatoon (City), [1989] 2 S.C.R. 1297 to establish bona fide occupational requirement (BFOR) under Act, s. 15(a)-Whether absolute rule requiring standard of uncorrected vision can be sustained as BFOR if individual testing satisfactory alternative-Duty termed "accommodation" by Tribunal having more limited meaning -- As "accommodate" meaning "individually test", Tribunal correctly concluding individual testing available to employer as practical alternative to adoption of discriminatory rule -- Factual determination by Tribunal meaning only no reviewable error in finding particular airline standard 20/80, higher than regulatory standard 20/200 established by TC for pilots in Canada not qualifying as BFOR -- Application dismissed -- Canadian Human Rights Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. H-6, s. 15(a).