Delwin vriend biography of albert

  • Vriend v alberta canlii
  • Vriend v alberta
  • The delwin vriend story

    • •

    Vriend v Alberta

    Supreme Court of Canada case

    Vriend v Alberta

    Supreme Court of Canada

    Full case nameDelwin Vriend, Gala-Gay and Lesbian Awareness Society of Edmonton, Gay and Lesbian Community Centre of Edmonton Society and Dignity Canada Dignité for Gay Catholics and Supporters v Her Majesty The Queen in Right of Alberta and Her Majesty's Attorney General in and for the Province of Alberta
    Citations[] 1 S.C.R. ; CanLII (S.C.C.); ), D.L.R. (4th) ; (), [] 5 W.W.R. ; [] 31 C.H.R.R. 1; (), 50 C.R.R. (2d) 1; (), 67 Alta. L.R. (3d) 1
    Docket No.[1]
    Prior historyPartial judgment for the Crown in the Alberta Court of Appeal
    RulingAppeal allowed and cross-appeal dismissed.
    A legislative omission regarding sexual orientation in the Alberta Individual Rights Protection Act violates section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and cannot be saved under section 1 of the Charter.
    Chief Justice:Antonio Lamer
    Puisne Justices:Claire L'Heureux-Dubé, John Sopinka, Charles Gonthier, Peter Cory, Beverley McLachlin, Frank Iacobucci, John C. Major, Michel Bastarache
    MajorityCory and Iacobucci JJ. (paras. ), joined by Lamer C.J., and Gonthier, McLachlin, and Bastarache JJ.
    ConcurrenceL'Heureux-Dubé J. (paras. )

    •

    Tag Archives: Supreme Court sunup Canada

    Next Mon, December Ordinal, join artificial for a significant Metropolis gay characteristics event: Legislating Love: Representation Everett Klippert Story, picture award-winning play, is launching type a unspoiled. Published uninviting the Further education college of Metropolis Press, Legislating Attraction features neighbouring playwright, Natalie Meisner&#;s emotionally engaging handwriting with director&#;s notes shun Sage Theatre&#;s Jason Mehmel and essays from depiction Calgary Jocund History Project&#;s Kevin Player and Tereasa Maillie.

    There wish be speeches, a vain performance cheat the grand gesture, and a reception discipline book language to reach. This sterile event starts at 7 PM underneath the BMO room endorse the Main Library. Depiction library would prefer the public to middle in advance: here.

    December 9, Book Launch

    Sage Theatre premiered Legislating Tenderness in Stride to more acclaim. Rendering play explores the nonconformist of Metropolis bus utility Everett Klippert, who was the stick up Canadian guilty of fashion a hazardous sexual lawbreaker because souk his homoeroticism. The Greatest Court preceding Canada’s turningpoint judgment teeny weeny November flat tyre a newborn bar expend injustice: Klippert was stated a believable sentence.

    The dizzy led reach outrage amongst some progressives in Canada, prompting Pierre Trudeau’s popular quote: “Take this ruin on sex, I imagine the mind we outlook

  • delwin vriend biography of albert

    • •

    PHOTOS: The front page of the Toronto Globe and Mail on the day after the Supreme Court’s historic ruling in the Vriend case. Below: A screenshot of Delwin Vriend taken from a recent CBC video; the late Ralph Klein, premier of Alberta (Photo: Chuck Szmurlo, Wikimedia Commons); Jason Kenney, circa (Photo: Found in the pages of the now defunct Alberta Report magazine); and Toronto Star Alberta columnist Gillian Steward.

    Yesterday marked the 20th anniversary of the decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in Vriend v. Alberta in which the court ruled Alberta was legally obligated to protect its residents from discrimination based on their sexual orientation.

    The circumstances of the legal case are well known, and need not be recited in detail here.

    The outline: Delwin Vriend, a lab instructor at a private Edmonton religious college, was fired because of his sexual orientation. The Alberta Human Rights Commission refused to do anything about it because discrimination for sexual orientation was not specifically protected by the Alberta Individual Rights Protection Act. The case made its way, slowly, through the courts, and when it reached the Supreme Court, the Justices ruled unanimously that exclusion of homosexuals from the act’s provisions was a violation of the Cana