Contempt of a Tribunal Order (General): Difference between revisions

From Riverview Legal Group
Access restrictions were established for this page. If you see this message, you have no access to this page.
(Created page with "Category:Civil Contempt ==Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Warman, 2011 FCA 297 (CanLII), [2013] 3 FCR 109<ref name="Warman"/>== <ref name="Warman">Canada (Human Ri...")
 
Line 3: Line 3:
==Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Warman, 2011 FCA 297 (CanLII), [2013] 3 FCR 109<ref name="Warman"/>==
==Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Warman, 2011 FCA 297 (CanLII), [2013] 3 FCR 109<ref name="Warman"/>==


[1] This is an appeal by the Canadian Human Rights Commission (the Commission or the appellant) from a decision of Harrington J. of the Federal Court (the Federal Court Judge) wherein he dismissed the contempt proceedings brought against Terry Tremaine (the respondent or Mr. Tremaine) based on his alleged failure to abide by the cease and desist order issued against him by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (the Tribunal).
[2] Although the Federal Court Judge found that Mr. Tremaine acted in contempt of the order of the Tribunal, he held that contempt could only be pronounced for a deliberate breach of an order of the Federal Court and that as at the material time Mr. Tremaine was not advised that the Tribunal order had been registered in the Federal Court, he could not be found in contempt. The appellant contends that in so holding, the Federal Court Judge committed a number of legal errors.
[3] For the reasons which follow, I am of the view that the appeal should be allowed and that Mr. Tremaine should be found in contempt for having defied the order of the Tribunal.





Revision as of 16:59, 29 November 2020


Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Warman, 2011 FCA 297 (CanLII), [2013] 3 FCR 109[1]

[1] This is an appeal by the Canadian Human Rights Commission (the Commission or the appellant) from a decision of Harrington J. of the Federal Court (the Federal Court Judge) wherein he dismissed the contempt proceedings brought against Terry Tremaine (the respondent or Mr. Tremaine) based on his alleged failure to abide by the cease and desist order issued against him by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (the Tribunal).

[2] Although the Federal Court Judge found that Mr. Tremaine acted in contempt of the order of the Tribunal, he held that contempt could only be pronounced for a deliberate breach of an order of the Federal Court and that as at the material time Mr. Tremaine was not advised that the Tribunal order had been registered in the Federal Court, he could not be found in contempt. The appellant contends that in so holding, the Federal Court Judge committed a number of legal errors.

[3] For the reasons which follow, I am of the view that the appeal should be allowed and that Mr. Tremaine should be found in contempt for having defied the order of the Tribunal.


[1]

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Warman, 2011 FCA 297 (CanLII), [2013] 3 FCR 109, <http://canlii.ca/t/fnnrc>, retrieved on 2020-11-29