Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Education And The Equal Status Acts - Stokes -V- Christian Brothers High School Clonmel, Mel Cousins
Education And The Equal Status Acts - Stokes -V- Christian Brothers High School Clonmel, Mel Cousins
Mel Cousins
This case involved a challenge under the Equal Status Act (ESA) to the admissions rules of a Clonmel secondary school which, it was argued, indirectly discriminated against children from the Traveller community. At first instance (before the Equality Tribunal) and on appeal to the Circuit Court it had been held that this rule did have a disproportionate impact on Travellers but the Court and Tribunal differed as to whether this was objectively justified or not. On further appeal to the High Court, McCarthy J. held that there was no disproportionate impact as, adopting a dictionary definition of the term ‘particular’, …
Pregnancy As A ‘Personal Circumstance’? A Case Study Of Equality Jurisprudence Under The Canadian Charter Of Rights, Mel Cousins
Pregnancy As A ‘Personal Circumstance’? A Case Study Of Equality Jurisprudence Under The Canadian Charter Of Rights, Mel Cousins
Mel Cousins
This article examines the recent decision of the Federal Court of Appeal in Miceli-Riggins v Attorney General of Canada as an example of the approach which the Canadian courts are taking to the interpretation of s. 15 of the Charter of Rights (in the area of social benefits) following the Supreme Court’s recent attempts to ‘restate’ that law in a series of cases. It argued that, whatever the intention of the Supreme Court, the restatement of the law has created general confusion in the lower courts and tribunals. In addition, in cases concerning social benefits, the Court’s statements, in cases …
Pension ‘Splitting’, Property Rights, Equality And The Canadian Charter Of Rights - Runchey V. Canada (Attorney General), 2013 Fca 16, Mel Cousins
Mel Cousins
This note discusses the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal in Runchey v. Canada (Attorney General). The case concerned an equality challenge concerning provisions of the Canada Pension Plan (the Plan) under s. 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. This was dismissed by the Court. However, the main focus of this note is to point out that it is arguable that the main issue raised in the case (i.e. the loss of pension rights by one spouse without any gain to the other) is not a s. 15 equality issue but rather an unjust deprivation …