Date: 19990608
Docket: A-204-96
CORAM: MARCEAU J.A.
NOËL J.A.
SEXTON J.A.
BETWEEN:
TONY MCALEER and
CANADIAN LIBERTY NET
Appellants
- and -
CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
and JOHN PAYZANT
Respondents
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the Bench at Vancouver, British Columbia,
on Tuesday, June 8, 1999)
MARCEAU J.A.
[1] We are of the view that the motions judge in the Trial Division was right in denying the application for judicial review of the Canadian Human Rights Commission decision ordering the appellants to cease a discriminatory practice under section 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act.1
[2] We substantially agree with the reasons for decision given by the motions judge and we subscribe to his analysis. So it should be sufficient to add a few comments on particular points on which counsel insisted in his presentation before us.
[3] Counsel"s basic argument was that the order of the Tribunal was so vague that it could be interpreted as condemning utterances directed at pedophilia per se , which is unacceptable since pedophilia is a criminal offence. We do not agree. As we read the Tribunal"s order and reasons, it seems to us clear that the ratio of the Tribunal was that the message had in it comments capable of exposing homosexuals to hatred and ridicule, a group whom our system of law protects against discrimination. Whether or not it is possible to say that the expression "sexual orientation" as used in this context may, as a pure matter of language, refer to others than gays, lesbians and bisexuals, the expression has been clarified in many decisions of the courts and is now well established as to its particular meaning, the one taken by the Tribunal.
[4] Counsel reiterated his argument with respect to the constitutionality of section 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act. In our view, however, the Supreme Court decision in R. v. Taylor2 does not allow us to question a finding that, while section 13(1) violates the liberty referred to in section 2(b) of the Charter, it is justified, when applied strictly and in proper cases, under section 1, as it only brings a reasonable limit to the free exercise of free speech. The ground of discrimination in Taylor, race and religion, was different from the one here involved, but this difference obviously cannot give rise to the determination and application of different principles.
[5] The appeal will be dismissed with costs.
"Louis Marceau"
J.A.
Date: 19990608
Docket: A-204-96
CORAM: MARCEAU J.A.
NOËL J.A.
SEXTON J.A.
BETWEEN:
TONY MCALEER and
CANADIAN LIBERTY NET
Appellants
- and -
CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
and JOHN PAYZANT
Respondents
Heard at Vancouver, British Columbia, on Tuesday, June 8, 1999.
Judgment rendered from the Bench on Tuesday, June 8, 1999.
| REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: MARCEAU J.A. |
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
Date: 19990608
Docket: A-204-96
BETWEEN:
TONY MCALEER and
CANADIAN LIBERTY NET
Appellants
- and -
CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
and JOHN PAYZANT
Respondents
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
OF THE COURT
__________________
1 R.C.S. 1985, c. H-6.
2 [1990] 3 S.C.R. 892.