Economic Development Edmonton v. Baah et al., 2003 ABQB 721

JudgePark, J.
CourtCourt of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
Case DateAugust 22, 2003
Citations2003 ABQB 721;(2003), 336 A.R. 280 (QB)

EDE v. Baah (2003), 336 A.R. 280 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2003] A.R. TBEd. SE.014

In the Matter of the Decision of the Chief Commissioner of the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission Made on August 1, 2002 Concluding that the Director should not have dismissed the Complaint Asare Baah Filed on March 19, 2001 Against Economic Development Edmonton

Economic Development Edmonton (applicant) v. Asare Baah and the Chief Commissioner of the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission

(Action No. 0203 15783; 2003 ABQB 721)

Indexed as: Economic Development Edmonton v. Baah et al.

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Edmonton

Park, J.

August 22, 2003.

Summary:

Baah was dismissed with cause from his employment with Economic Development Edmonton. Baah signed an Acceptance and Release. Baah filed a complaint with the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission. An investigator concluded that the claim was without merit. Baah submitted a request for review. The Chief Commissioner held that the claim should not have been dismissed and directed the claim to a panel. Economic Development Edmonton applied for judicial review.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application.

Editor's Note: Certain names in the following case have been initialized or the case otherwise edited to prevent the disclosure of identities where required by law, publication ban, Maritime Law Book's editorial policy or otherwise.

Civil Rights - Topic 7044

Federal or provincial legislation - General -Role of investigator - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the role of an Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission investigator was only to gather the facts and to make a recommendation as to whether or not the facts warranted a hearing - Weighing the facts and determining the merit of a claim was the role of the gatekeeper, i.e., the director or chief commissioner - See paragraph 29.

Civil Rights - Topic 7044.2

Federal or provincial legislation - General -Role of Director - [See Civil Rights - Topic 7044 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 7106

Federal or provincial legislation - Practice - Settlements and releases - Baah was dismissed from his employment with Economic Development Edmonton (EDE) - Baah signed an Acceptance and Release - Baah filed a complaint with the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission - An investigator concluded that the claim was without merit - Baah submitted a request for review - The Chief Commissioner held that the claim should not have been dismissed - EDE applied for judicial review, arguing that Baah had executed a valid release which relieved EDE from any obligations arising from Baah's employment - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the validity of the release was in issue - The court directed that the panel determine the validity of the release before determining the merit of the claim - Further, the court noted that the release dealt with economic liability, not liability respecting human rights legislation or alleged discrimination - See paragraphs 47 to 62.

Cases Noticed:

Chow v. Mobil Oil Canada (1999), 248 A.R. 372; 72 Alta. L.R.(3d) 108 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 12].

Mis v. Human Rights and Citizenship Commission (Alta.) (2002), 326 A.R. 99 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 32].

Mis v. Human Rights and Citizenship Commission (Alta.) (2001), 293 A.R. 391; 257 W.A.C. 391 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 33].

Syndicat des employées de production du Québec et de l'Acadie v. Canadian Human Rights Commissioner and Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the Attorney General of Canada (1990), 2 C.H.R.R. D/1, refd to. [para. 42].

Pushpanathan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 982, addendum [1998] 1 S.C.R. 1222; 226 N.R. 201, refd to. [para. 43].

Counsel:

Thomas Wakeling, Q.C., for the applicant.

Audrey Dean, for the respondent, Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission.

John Carpenter, for the respondent, Asare Baah.

This application was heard by Park, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Edmonton, who delivered the following reasons for judgment on August 22, 2003.

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 practice notes
  • Chartrand v. Human Rights and Citizenship Commission (Alta.) et al., 2008 ABQB 207
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • April 7, 2008
    ...168; 2004 ABQB 546, refd to. [para. 17]. Economic Development Edmonton v. Baah et al., [2005] A.R. Uned. 245; 2005 ABCA 279, affing. (2003), 336 A.R. 280; 2003 ABQB 721, refd to. [para. Mis v. Human Rights and Citizenship Commission (Alta.) (2001), 293 A.R. 391; 257 W.A.C. 391; 2001 ABCA 21......
  • St. Albert and Area Student Health Initiative Partnership et al. v. Polczer et al., (2007) 447 A.R. 27 (QB)
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • September 28, 2007
    ... 2006 ABQB 776 , refd to. [para. 51]. Economic Development Edmonton v. Baah et al., [2005] A.R. Uned. 245 ; 2005 ABCA 279 , affing. (2003), 336 A.R. 280; 2003 ABQB 721 , refd to. [para. Neumann v. Human Rights and Citizenship Commission (Alta.) et al., [2005] A.R. Uned. 753 ; 2005 ABQB......
  • Small v. Caritas Health Group et al., (2003) 347 A.R. 322 (QB)
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • August 29, 2003
    ...141 N.R. 185; 13 B.C.A.C. 245; 24 W.A.C. 245; 95 D.L.R.(4th) 577, refd to. [para. 50]. Economic Development Edmonton v. Baah et al. (2003), 336 A.R. 280; 2003 ABQB 721, refd to. [para. Cooper v. Canadian Human Rights Commission, [1996] 3 S.C.R. 854; 204 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 59]. Statutes......
  • Economic Development Edmonton v. Wong et al., (2005) 371 A.R. 362 (CA)
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • June 7, 2005
    ...stage. The employer applied for judicial review of both decisions. The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the applications (see 336 A.R. 280 and [2004] A.R. Uned. 747). The employer appealed both The Alberta Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals. The following is the appeal respecting......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • Chartrand v. Human Rights and Citizenship Commission (Alta.) et al., 2008 ABQB 207
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • April 7, 2008
    ...168; 2004 ABQB 546, refd to. [para. 17]. Economic Development Edmonton v. Baah et al., [2005] A.R. Uned. 245; 2005 ABCA 279, affing. (2003), 336 A.R. 280; 2003 ABQB 721, refd to. [para. Mis v. Human Rights and Citizenship Commission (Alta.) (2001), 293 A.R. 391; 257 W.A.C. 391; 2001 ABCA 21......
  • St. Albert and Area Student Health Initiative Partnership et al. v. Polczer et al., (2007) 447 A.R. 27 (QB)
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • September 28, 2007
    ... 2006 ABQB 776 , refd to. [para. 51]. Economic Development Edmonton v. Baah et al., [2005] A.R. Uned. 245 ; 2005 ABCA 279 , affing. (2003), 336 A.R. 280; 2003 ABQB 721 , refd to. [para. Neumann v. Human Rights and Citizenship Commission (Alta.) et al., [2005] A.R. Uned. 753 ; 2005 ABQB......
  • Small v. Caritas Health Group et al., (2003) 347 A.R. 322 (QB)
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • August 29, 2003
    ...141 N.R. 185; 13 B.C.A.C. 245; 24 W.A.C. 245; 95 D.L.R.(4th) 577, refd to. [para. 50]. Economic Development Edmonton v. Baah et al. (2003), 336 A.R. 280; 2003 ABQB 721, refd to. [para. Cooper v. Canadian Human Rights Commission, [1996] 3 S.C.R. 854; 204 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 59]. Statutes......
  • Economic Development Edmonton v. Wong et al., (2005) 371 A.R. 362 (CA)
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • June 7, 2005
    ...stage. The employer applied for judicial review of both decisions. The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the applications (see 336 A.R. 280 and [2004] A.R. Uned. 747). The employer appealed both The Alberta Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals. The following is the appeal respecting......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT