Reasons of The Court
The majority held that absent a Charter challenge of the constitutional validity of the Canadian Human Rights Act, there was no grounds for a claim.
The only issues raised in the appeal was a question of law on whether the Federal Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to overturn the Tribunal under s. 28 of the Federal Court Act and of statutory interpretation of the Canadian Human Rights Act.
It was held that the Federal Court of Appeal did have the necessary jurisdiction to review the Tribunal's decision, as there was no privative clause governing the Tribunal. Since the question posed to the Tribunal was one of statutory interpretation, a question of law, judicial deference was not warranted.
On the question of whether there was discrimination on the basis of "family status", the court found that there was no grounds for Mossop's claim because Parliament intentionally excluded sexual orientation from the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination. Since the intent was clear, both the Federal Court and Tribunal were bound to apply the law.
Read more about this topic: Canada (Attorney General) V. Mossop
Famous quotes containing the words reasons and/or court:
“Adolescents, for all their self-involvement, are emerging from the self-centeredness of childhood. Their perception of other people has more depth. They are better equipped at appreciating others’ reasons for action, or the basis of others’ emotions. But this maturity functions in a piecemeal fashion. They show more understanding of their friends, but not of their teachers.”
—Terri Apter (20th century)
“If a walker is indeed an individualist there is nowhere he can’t go at dawn and not many places he can’t go at noon. But just as it demeans life to live alongside a great river you can no longer swim in or drink from, to be crowded into safer areas and hours takes much of the gloss off walking—one sport you shouldn’t have to reserve a time and a court for.”
—Edward Hoagland (b. 1932)