Ukrainian Museum of the Ukrainian Women's Association of Canada v. Human Rights Commission (Sask.) et al., (2010) 356 Sask.R. 220 (QB)

• Judge: Ryan-Froslie, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: April 30, 2010
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (2010), 356 Sask.R. 220 (QB);2010 SKQB 162

Ukrainian Museum v. HRC (2010), 356 Sask.R. 220 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2010] Sask.R. TBEd. MY.017

In The Matter Of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code

And In The Matter Of a complaint of Olya Demczuk before the Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal

Ukrainian Museum of the Ukrainian Women's Association of Canada (applicant) v. Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal and Olya Demczuk (respondents)

(2010 Q.B. No. 204; 2010 SKQB 162)

Indexed As: Ukrainian Museum of the Ukrainian Women's Association of Canada v. Human Rights Commission (Sask.) et al.

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Saskatoon

Ryan-Froslie, J.

April 30, 2010.

Summary:

On March 21, 2006, Demczuk filed a formal complaint under the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code against her former employer, alleging that it had failed to accommodate her medical disability. More than four years passed without a hearing. The employer applied for an order under Queen's Bench Rule 664 and the court's inherent jurisdiction to stay or quash the proceedings before the Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal on the grounds of inordinate delay.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application as premature.

Administrative Law - Topic 2158

Natural justice - Administrative decisions or findings - Delay - In 2006, Demczuk filed a formal complaint under the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code against her former employer, alleging that it had failed to accommodate her medical disability - More than four years passed without a hearing - The employer applied for an order to stay or quash the proceedings before the Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal on the grounds of inordinate delay - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench held that to be successful in a case of delay respecting an administrative tribunal, the employer had to establish inordinate delay plus resulting prejudice which would either affect its right to a fair hearing or amount to an abuse of process - The court dismissed the application as premature - The Tribunal would be in a far better position to determine whether there was prejudice caused by impairment of a "key witness" or financial prejudice.

Administrative Law - Topic 2293

Natural justice - Unfairness - Abuse of power or abuse of process - [See Administrative Law - Topic 2158 ].

Administrative Law - Topic 2402

Natural justice - Procedure - General - Duty of fairness - [See Administrative Law - Topic 2158 ].

Cases Noticed:

Blencoe v. Human Rights Commission (B.C.) et al., [2000] 2 S.C.R. 307; 260 N.R. 1; 141 B.C.A.C. 161; 231 W.A.C. 161; 2000 SCC 44, folld. [para. 30].

Misra v. College of Physicians and Surgeons (Sask.) (1988), 70 Sask.R. 116; 52 D.L.R.(4th) 477 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 30].

Watson v. Chief of Police of the Regina Police Service et al. (2005), 265 Sask.R. 161; 2005 SKQB 286, refd to. [para. 30].

Investment Dealers Association of Canada v. MacBain et al. (2007), 299 Sask.R. 122; 408 W.A.C. 122; 2007 SKCA 70, refd to. [para. 30].

Human Rights Commission (Ont.) v. Dofasco Inc. et al. (2007), 230 O.A.C. 93 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 30].

Jeffrey v. Dofasco Inc. - see Human Rights Commission (Ont.) v. Dofasco Inc. et al.

Surrey (City) v. Ahlwat et al., [2002] B.C.T.C. 63; 39 Admin. L.R.(3d) 158; 2002 BCSC 63, refd to. [para. 30].

Zhang v. Victoria Police Department (No. 5), [2008] B.C.H.R.T.D. 227; 2008 BCHRT 227, refd to. [para. 30].

Warren v. Criminal Injuries Compensation Board (Ont.) et al. (2005), 205 O.A.C. 173; 2005 CanLII 44842 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 30].

New Brunswick v. Human Rights Commission (N.B.) (2009), 344 N.B.R.(2d) 210; 884 A.P.R. 210; 2009 NBQB 47, refd to. [para. 31].

Grover v. National Research Council of Canada, [2009] C.H.R.D. 1; 2009 CHRT 1, refd to. [para. 30].

Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse v. Centre de la petite enfance Les Pandamis et al., 2006 QCTDP 11, refd to. [para. 30].

University of Saskatchewan v. Dumbovic et al. (2007), 297 Sask.R. 1; 2007 SKQB 182, refd to. [para. 30].

Saskatchewan v. Saskatchewan Government and General Employees' Union et al. (2008), 325 Sask.R. 263; 2008 SKQB 341, refd to. [para. 30].

International Capital Corp. v. Schafer et al.(2010), 350 Sask.R. 160; 487 W.A.C. 160; 2010 SKCA 48, dist. [para. 31].

International Capital Corp. v. Robinson, Twigg & Ketilson et al. - see International Capital Corp. v. Schafer et al.

CIP Paper Products Ltd. v. Human Rights Commission (Sask.) (1978), 87 D.L.R.(3d) 609 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

Board of Education of District No. 15 v. Human Rights Board of Inquiry (N.B.) (1989), 100 N.B.R.(2d) 181; 252 A.P.R. 181; 62 D.L.R.(4th) 512 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

Board of School Trustees, District No. 15 v. New Brunswick (Minister of Labour) - see Board of Education of District No. 15 v. Human Rights Board of Inquiry (N.B.).

Kawula v. Institute of Chartered Accountants of Saskatchewan et al. (2010), 348 Sask.R. 213; 2010 SKQB 11, refd to. [para. 35].

Sander v. Certified General Accountants Association (2007), 306 Sask.R. 46; 2007 SKQB 413, refd to. [para. 35].

Hospital Employees' Union et al. v. Canadian Forest Products Ltd. et al., [2005] B.C.T.C. Uned. 394; 35 Admin. L.R.(4th) 98; 2005 BCSC 877; 2006 BCSC 262, refd to. [para. 35].

Canadian Pacific Ltd. v. Matsqui Indian Band et al., [1995] 1 S.C.R. 3; 177 N.R. 325, refd to. [para. 35].

Huerto v. College of Physicians and Surgeons (Sask.) (2001), 211 Sask.R. 200; 2001 SKQB 431, refd to. [para. 35].

Board of Education of Elbow School District et al. v. Board of Education of Outlook School Division No. 32 et al. (1993), 110 Sask.R. 183 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 35].

Siemens et al. v. Bawolin et al. (2002), 219 Sask.R. 282; 272 W.A.C. 282; 2002 SKCA 84, refd to. [para. 35].

Counsel:

R. Danyliuk, Q.C., for the applicant;

J. Gingell, for the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission;

J. Stevens (watching brief only), for the Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal;

No one appearing, for the complainant, Olya Demczuk.

This application was heard by Ryan-Froslie, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, of the Judicial Centre of Saskatoon, who delivered the following decision on April 30, 2010.