Madsen v. Canada ( Attorney General )
T-2540-94
Heald D.J.
25/1/96
22 pp.
Application for judicial review of decision of Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) dismissing applicant's complaint filed against Canada Employment and Immigration Commission (CEIC)-Applicant alleging denial of services accessible to persons without vision problems, false information placed on file, financial losses, lack of equal opportunities-Investigator appointed to investigate applicant's complaint-Conciliator appointed for purpose of attempting to bring about settlement of complaint-Failing to resolve complaint-Applicant refusing CEIC's settlement offer-Complaint subsequently considered by CHRC at June 6, 7, 1994 meeting-CHRC deciding inquiry into complaint by Human Rights Tribunal not warranted, closing file-Whether CHRC committed reviewable error in deciding to close applicant's file, thereby dismissing complaint- Seven documents (Exhibits A-1 to A7) sought to be admitted by applicant inadmissible evidence-CHRC must comply with rules of procedural fairness-Standard of review of finding of law by Human Rights Tribunal low standard of correctness as tribunal not afforded special protection of privative clause-Same standard of review applying to decisions of CHRC as CHRC also not protected by privative clause, having no greater expertise than court with respect to issues in question-Decision under review discretionary decision of CHRC-CHRC breaching duty of procedural fairness in failing to disclose to applicant CEIC's May 9, 1994 submissions-Rules of procedural fairness not requiring CHRC to systematically disclose to one party comments received from other-CEIC's May 9, 1994 submissions containing at least three new allegations of fact not contained in record-Allegations also false, thereby seriously damaging to applicant's credibility-Applicant should have been given opportunity to refute allegations- Denial of opportunity denial of procedural fairness-CHRC not breaching duty of procedural fairness because Director of Compliance not reminding Commissioners of Canadian Human Rights Act, s. 53(2)(c)-CHRC not breaching duty of fairness because applicant was only read details of CEIC's settlement proposal and apology over telephone- Applicant informed of substance of settlement proposal, provided with Conciliation Report, had two opportunities to make comprehensive submissions to CHRC-CHRC not breaching duty of procedural fairness in failing to advise applicant how to prepare compensation request, by considering and deciding applicant's case in short period of time-Failure of CHRC to provide applicant with opportunity to respond to new factual allegations violation of rules of procedural fairness-Application allowed-Canadian Human Rights Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. H-6, s. 53(2)(c).