Miller v. Canada ( Human Rights Commission )
T-2576-94
Dubé J.
29/5/96
12 pp.
Application for judicial review of CHRC's decision dismissing applicant's complaint against Commission and respondent Harvey Goldberg pursuant to CHRA, s. 44(3)(b)(i)-Applicant, of Aboriginal origin, claiming employment terminated because of race, colour, national and ethnic origin contrary to Act, s. 7-Also alleging systemic discrimination against Aboriginal persons contrary to Act, ss. 10, 14-Commission appointed outside investigator experienced in field of human rights and work extensively with Aboriginal people-Recommended dismissal of complaint on grounds allegations of discrimination unfounded-Applicant requesting copies of witness statements gathered in course of investigation-As master of own process, Commission mandated to weigh evidence and determine whether reasonable basis for proceeding to next stage-Such determination administrative in nature and need not be made on judicial or quasi-judicial basis-Must inform parties of substance of evidence secured by investigator and provide parties with opportunity to respond and make all relevant representations-Investigations conducted by investigator must be neutral and thorough-No obligation to interview every person suggested or address every alleged incident of discrimination-Courts ought not interfere with exercise of discretion by statutory authority merely because Court might have exercised discretion in different manner-Judicial review of investigation only warranted when such investigation clearly deficient-No evidence principles of procedural fairness not adhered to in present case-On question of bias, test whether reasonable and right minded persons, applying themselves to question and obtaining required information, would perceive bias on part of adjudicator-Mere suspicions not sufficient-To give complainant right to influence selection of investigator would run counter to Canada's multicultural and multiracial heritage and would raise apprehension of bias in favour of complainant violating rights of persons against whom complaint made-Reasonable apprehension of bias not created by appointment of nonAboriginal investigator-Present case exception to maxim nemo debet esse judex in propria causa (no man ought to be a judge in his own cause) due to statutory necessity Commission exercise jurisdiction-Contrary to intent of statute and in excess of jurisdiction for Commission to accord its own employees privileged treatment by automatic referral of complaints to Tribunal-Complainant not entitled to every detail but should be informed of broad grounds of case-Not entitled to investigator's notes of interviews-Application dismissed-Canadian Human Rights Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. H-6, s. 44(3)(b)(i) (as am. by R.S.C., 1985 (1st Supp.), c. 31, s. 64).