What is a Tribunal hearing?

The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal hears cases referred to it by the Canadian Human Rights Commission pursuant to the Canadian Human Rights Act.

For general information on the role and mandate of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal see: About the CHRT on the CHRT’s website.

For more detailed information see CHRT Rules and Procedures.

For Tribunal decisions and rulings see Tribunal Decisions.

Is the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal part of the CHRC?

The Commission and the Tribunal were both created by the CHRA. The CHRA provides that the Tribunal and the Commission are completely separate bodies which act independently of each other.

Does the Commission represent complainants before the Tribunal?

The Commission does not represent complainants before the Tribunal in section 13 cases or any other case it refers to the Tribunal.

The role of the Commission before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal is to represent the public interest. Section 51 of the CHRA states:

In appearing at a hearing, presenting evidence and making representations, the Commission shall adopt such position as, in its opinion, is in the public interest having regard to the nature of the complaint.

Whether the Commission participates at a hearing, and the extent of participation is determined on a case-by-case basis by considering the public interest aspects of a particular case.

Can legal costs be awarded by the Tribunal?

The Act does not allow the Tribunal to award costs of legal representation to a successful respondent.

The Canadian Human Rights Act Review Panel considered whether the Tribunal should be enabled to award costs. They concluded:

We considered the issue of whether the Act should specifically empower the Tribunal to award costs. We do not think that costs of legal proceedings are generally appropriate in human rights cases under the Act...

What remedies can the Tribunal order?

Pursuant to section 54 of the CHRA, if the Tribunal finds that section 13 has been violated, it may order the respondent to:

• cease any activities contrary to section 13 and to desist from operating any website that contains similar information (a cease and desist order);
• compensate a victim specifically identified on the website up to $20,000 if the actions of the respondent have been found to have been wilful or reckless (special compensation);
• pay a penalty of not more that $10,000.

Can the Tribunal order an apology?

Prior to 2003, Tribunals had, on occasion, ordered apologies be issued with regard to complaints filed under other sections of the CHRA when it found the actions of the respondent to be particular egregious. However, in 2003 the Federal Court of Canada ruled in the case of Canada (Attorney General) v. Stevenson that the Tribunal had exceeded its jurisdiction in ordering a coerced apology.

Can someone be sent to prison for contravening section 13?

Neither the Commission nor the Tribunal has the power to imprison persons who have been found to have contravened section 13 of the CHRA.

In appropriate circumstances, when a respondent fails to comply with an order of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, an application may be made to the Federal Court of Canada for an order of contempt and this can result in imprisonment.

What action can be taken to enforce an order of the Tribunal?

Tribunal decisions may be made orders of the Federal Court of Canada. This means that if a respondent fails to implement a Tribunal order the order can be enforced by the Federal Court.

Are decisions of the CHRC subject to court review?

Decisions the Commission are subject to judicial review by the Federal Court of Canada pursuant to section 18.1 of the Federal Courts Act.

According section 18.1(4) of the Federal Courts Act the grounds for a judicial review are broad:

(4) The Federal Court may grant relief under subsection (3) if it is satisfied that the federal board, commission or other tribunal

a) acted without jurisdiction, acted beyond its jurisdiction or refused to exercise its jurisdiction;

b) failed to observe a principle of natural justice, procedural fairness or other procedure that it was required by law to observe;

c) erred in law in making a decision or an order, whether or not the error appears on the face of the record;

d) based its decision or order on an erroneous finding of fact that it made in a perverse or capricious manner or without regard for the material before it;

e) acted, or failed to act, by reason of fraud or perjured evidence; or

f) acted in any other way that was contrary to law.