Northcott v. Canada (Attorney General), 2021 FC 289
| Jurisdiction | Federal Jurisdiction (Canada) |
| Court | Federal Court (Canada) |
| Date | 01 April 2021 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
2 practice notes
-
Zoghbi v. Air Canada,
...include the facts, statutory and jurisprudential requirements and precedent” (at para 14). [37] Northcott v Canada (Attorney General), 2021 FC 289 [Northcott], a case that bears some resemblance to this one, concerned a decision by the Commission to dismiss a complaint because any useful re......
-
Carrasqueiras v. Sunwing Airlines Inc., 2022 FC 1714
...sensitive to the matter: Vavilov at para 128. This is no different for a human rights complaint: Northcott v Canada (Attorney General), 2021 FC 289 [Northcott] at para 42. [24] However, before a decision is set aside for being unreasonable, the reviewing court must be satisfied that “there ......
3 cases
-
Zavarella v. Canada (Attorney General), 2024 FC 87
...Vavilov, at paras 127-128; Ernst v. Canadian National Railway Company, 2021 FC 16, at paras 74-76; Northcott v. Canada (Attorney General), 2021 FC 289, at para 41. [90] In Ernst, this Court set aside a screening decision of the Commission made under subparagraph 44(3)(b)(i) of the CHRA. An ......
-
Zoghbi v. Air Canada,
...include the facts, statutory and jurisprudential requirements and precedent” (at para 14). [37] Northcott v Canada (Attorney General), 2021 FC 289 [Northcott], a case that bears some resemblance to this one, concerned a decision by the Commission to dismiss a complaint because any useful re......
-
Carrasqueiras v. Sunwing Airlines Inc., 2022 FC 1714
...sensitive to the matter: Vavilov at para 128. This is no different for a human rights complaint: Northcott v Canada (Attorney General), 2021 FC 289 [Northcott] at para 42. [24] However, before a decision is set aside for being unreasonable, the reviewing court must be satisfied that “there ......