name: Warman v. Marc Lemire
unofficial_text: Warman v. Marc Lemire
  Collection
  Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
  Date
  2008-06-09
  Neutral citation
  2008 CHRT 22
  File number(s)
  T1073/5405
  Decision-maker(s)
  Hadjis, Athanasios
  Decision type
  Ruling
  Decision status
  Interim
  Grounds
  Colour
  National or Ethnic Origin
  Race
  Religion
  Sexual Orientation
  Decision Content
  Between:
  Richard Warman
  Complainant
  - and -
  Canadian Human Rights Commission
  Commission
  - and –
  Marc Lemire
  Respondent
  - and -
  Attorney General of Canada
  Canadian Association for Free Expression
  Canadian Free Speech League
  Canadian Jewish Congress
  Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center for Holocaust Studies
  League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith
  Interested parties
  Ruling
  Member: Athanasios D. Hadjis Date: June 9, 2008 Citation: 2008 CHRT 22
  [1] On May 16, 2008, the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA) applied for leave to intervene in the Constitutional Challenge of ss. 13 and 54 of the Canadian Human Rights Act before this Tribunal. It is seeking permission to file a written argument, introduce evidence, receive and reply to all other parties’ arguments and evidence regarding the proper interpretation of ss. 13 and 54, to cross-examine witnesses and to present oral argument. The BCCLA does not anticipate calling witnesses but requests permission to apply for the right in the future.
  [2] The Commission, the Complainant and the Attorney General of Canada have objected to the BCCLA’s request.
  [3] As was noted in the Tribunal’s recent ruling in the present case, which dealt with a similar request by the Canadian Constitutional Foundation (CCF) (Warman v. Lemire, 2008 CHRT 7), the Tribunal has wide discretion with respect to the granting of interested party status. Just like the CCF, however, the BCCLA has made its request extremely late in this hearing’s process, as we approach the dates for final oral submissions, after having heard over five weeks of evidence. The present circumstances thus differ significantly from those that were before the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal, which recently granted the BCCLA intervenor status before the commencement of the hearing (Elmasry v. Roger’s Publishing Ltd., 2008 BCHRT 199).
  [4] The BCCLA claims that it had intended to seek interested party status in the present case as early as 2006 but that it was unable to secure legal counsel to represent it. That may well be, but the fact remains that its request actually arrived in May 2008. The concerns and issues raised by the Tribunal in the earlier ruling denying the CCF’s request to intervene at this late stage apply equally to the BCCLA.
  [5] As was noted in that ruling as well, nothing prevents the BCCLA from sharing any specific arguments that it feels are relevant to the constitutional issue with those parties in this case who are challenging the constitutionality of ss. 13 and 54.
  [6] The British Columbia Civil Liberties Association’s request is therefore denied.
  Signed by
  Athanasios D. Hadjis Tribunal Member
  Ottawa, Ontario June 9, 2008
  Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
  Parties of Record
  Tribunal File: T1073/5405
  Style of Cause: Richard Warman v. Marc Lemire
  Ruling of the Tribunal Dated: June 9, 2008
  Appearances:
  Richard Warman, for himself
  Margot Blight, for the Canadian Human Rights Commission
  Barbara Kulaszka, for the Respondent
  Simon Fothergill, for the Attorney General of Canada
  Paul Fromm, for the Canadian Association for Free Expression
  Douglas Christie For the Canadian Free Speech League
  Joel Richler, for the Canadian Jewish Congress
  Steven Skurka, for the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center for Holocaust Studies
  Marvin Kurz, for the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith
  