Human Rights Archives

November 15, 2011

Factum in the D.A.I. Case

In the D.A. I. case, the Supreme Court of Canada was asked to consider whether people with intellectual disabilities should be allowed to testify in court. Specifically, the question before the Court is whether people with intellectual disabilities are required to demonstrate an understanding of the concept of a “promise to tell the truth” in order to be permitted to testify. CCD was been granted intervener status in this case.  CCD argued that courts should not impose a test to allow people with disabilities to testify that is not imposed on others. Courts should focus scrutiny on the testimony given by individuals not the individuals themselves. Read more.

May 27, 2010

Factum in the Caron Case

Fighting a case in court is costly and CCD learned this lesson during its litigating against VIA Rail in support of accessible passenger trains. The Caron case focuses on the court's power to award interim costs while a case is in progress rather than waiting until its conclusion. An interim award provides a litigant with some of the resources it needs to present its case to the court.

CCD, working in coalition with other organizations (LEAF, Charter Committee on Poverty and the Poverty and Human Rights Centre), is intervening in the Caron case. Read more.

January 11, 2013

Factum in the Carter Case

The Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD) and the Canadian Association for Community Living (CACL) were granted intervenor status in the appeal of the Carter Case, which struck down Canada’s Criminal Code prohibitions against assisted suicide. CCD/CACL argued in their factum Criminal Code prohibitions on assisting suicide and on euthanasia are justified and in accord with the principles of fundamental justice. CCD and CACL requested an order that the appeal be allowed and the trial judgement set aside. Following directions from the Court, CCD and CACL restricted their factum to arguments based upon Section 7 (Security of the Person) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Another intervenor, the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition was directed by the Court to focus on Section 15 (Equality Rights) arguments. Read more.

November 18, 2012

The Moore Case: Summary of Key Points

The Moore case says that students with disabilities are entitled to receive the accommodation measures they need to access and benefit from the service of public education.  In this regard, the Court said that adequate special education is not “a dispensable luxury”.  With respect to children with learning disabilities, the Court said that such services serve as “the ramp that provides access to the statutory commitment to education made to all children in British Columbia.” Read more.

March 23, 2012

Factum in the Moore Case

CCD has intervened in this appeal because it is deeply concerned about the template for comparator group analysis adopted by the lower courts, reducing the right to accommodation to a right to the same treatment or same accommodation that others receive. The reasoning of the lower courts, if accepted by this Court, threatens to make the duty to accommodate meaningless, thereby profoundly eroding the human rights of persons with disabilities in a wide variety of settings. Read more.

February 10, 2012

Supreme Court Ensures that the Voice of Women with Disabilities Will Be Heard by Courts

The Supreme Court’s decision in the DAI case upholds that all persons, regardless of disability, will have their day in court when their rights have been violated. Read more.

November 15, 2011

Factum in the D.A.I. Case

In the D.A. I. case, the Supreme Court of Canada was asked to consider whether people with intellectual disabilities should be allowed to testify in court. Specifically, the question before the Court is whether people with intellectual disabilities are required to demonstrate an understanding of the concept of a “promise to tell the truth” in order to be permitted to testify. CCD was been granted intervener status in this case.  CCD argued that courts should not impose a test to allow people with disabilities to testify that is not imposed on others. Courts should focus scrutiny on the testimony given by individuals not the individuals themselves. Read more.

March 8, 2011

Factum in the Mowat Case

This case involves a woman, Ms. Donna Mowat, who filed a human rights complaint after she experienced sexual harassment at work. According to the Federal Court of Appeal, Ms. Mowat, whose sexual harassment complaint was largely successful, was entitled to only $4000 in compensation, although her legal fees to bring her complaint forward were nearly $200,000.

In this appeal, the Supreme Court was asked to decide if those who experience discrimination should be reimbursed for their legal costs relating to filing human rights complaints. The legal fees to file complaints and to have them heard by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal can be more than what is awarded as compensation to successful complainants. As a result of this, even when victims of discrimination win their cases, they are very often out of pocket several thousands of dollars.

The CCD argued that the human rights legislation must be accessible to people who experience discrimination. This is particularly important for people with disabilities who represent the largest proportion of complainants before the Canadian Human Rights Commission. Read more.

May 11, 2013

Yvonne Peters, Gwen Brodsky, Ravi Malhotra Discuss Inclusion After the Moore Case

Along with others, some members of the CCD Human Rights Committee share their views on the impact of the Moore case.  Read more.

January 29, 2013

CMHR to feature the most inclusive design in Canadian history

“The exciting thing for people with disabilities is not only that a space is being created for a new understanding of human rights, but that it will also be fully accessible,” Laurie Beachell, CCD national coordinator said. “As our understanding of human rights evolves, so will our understanding of access and inclusive design. The disability community is pleased to be part of something that can raise awareness about what inclusion really means.” Read more.

April 17, 2012

Constitutional Equality Rights: People with Disabilities Still Celebrating 30 Years Later

“CCD celebrates the anniversary of the Charter and all those who have been using it to remove barriers to the full and equal participation of people with disabilities,” states Tony Dolan, CCD Chairperson. “April 17 is an important anniversary which we must celebrate every year.”

  Read more.

March 23, 2012

Factum in the Moore Case

CCD has intervened in this appeal because it is deeply concerned about the template for comparator group analysis adopted by the lower courts, reducing the right to accommodation to a right to the same treatment or same accommodation that others receive. The reasoning of the lower courts, if accepted by this Court, threatens to make the duty to accommodate meaningless, thereby profoundly eroding the human rights of persons with disabilities in a wide variety of settings. Read more.

March 21, 2012

Supreme Court of Canada Hears Access to Education in Disabled Student's Case

“Access to education, including effective accommodation, is fundamental to ensuring that persons with disabilities will become full and equal citizens, able to participate equally in the workforce and all aspects of Canadian society,” said Dean Richert, Co-chairperson of CCD Human Rights Committee.  Read more.

May 16, 2011

Fundamental Disability Rights Case Goes to Supreme Court of Canada

On May Tuesday May 17th the Supreme Court of Canada will be asked to consider whether people with intellectual disabilities should be allowed to testify in court. Specifically, the question before the Court is whether people with intellectual disabilities are required to demonstrate an understanding of the concept of a “promise to tell the truth” in order to be permitted to testify. The Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD) has been granted intervener status in this case. Read more.

April 23, 2013

Prejudice Erodes Free Choice in End of Life Decision-making

Rather than a steady diet of the pathos of Susan Griffiths’ story, Free Press readers would be better served by an informed discussion of how cultural practices toward disability affect end of life choices; the need for procedural safeguards if assisted suicide is decriminalized and how decriminalization of assisted suicide will not disrupt the power imbalance between doctors and patients to the point where the Susan Griffiths of the world will receive assisted suicide on demand. Read more.

April 23, 2013

Suicide Celebration Instead of Suicide Prevention

23 April 2013, WINNIPEG, MB – According to media reports, Susan Griffiths’ assisted suicide will likely occur on Thursday (25 April 2013) at a Dignitas Clinic in Switzerland.  Members of the Canadian disability community, who oppose assisted suicide, are available to discuss their concerns about assisted suicide with the media on Wednesday (24 April 2013) and Thursday (25 April 2013).  Their contact information is listed below. Read more.

April 3, 2013

Canada's MPs Hear from CCD about Our Opposition to Assisted Suicide

The Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD), a national organization of men and women with disabilities, working for an accessible and inclusive Canada, applauds the Attorney General of Canada for appealing the decision in the Carter case, which struck down Canada’s prohibitions against assisted suicide.  Read more.

March 18, 2013

CCD AND CACL TO TESTIFY AT CARTER APPEAL (Assisted Suicide) HEARING

CCD and CACL, who represent persons with disabilities throughout Canada, will argue that the ban should remain in place, because assisted suicide reinforces disability discrimination and puts vulnerable persons at risk. Read more.

March 18, 2013

Frequently Asked Questions about Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia

March 15, 2013

Assisted Suicide Case and Canadians with Disabilities Opposition

CCD and CACL oppose any change in the Criminal Code that would allow assisted suicide.  Vulnerable persons, people with disabilities and the elderly will be put at risk if the law is changed. Read more.