Ruling (.pdf) - International Center for Law and Religion Studies

confronted about being in a same sex relationship was it alleged that she had failed tomeet any other employment qualification.[163] The section deems the violation of a right in section 5 (in this case freedom fromdiscrimination based on sexual orientation) not to be an infringement where, in part, thequalification is reasonable and bona fide because of the nature of the employment. Ms.Heintz’s right to be free from discrimination in employment is alleged to have beeninfringed by the imposition of the Lifestyle and Morality Statement. Therefore, I focusmy analysis on the question of whether being in compliance with the Lifestyle andMorality Statement is a reasonable and bona fide qualification. I make no finding aboutthe Doctrinal Statement.2008 HRTO 22 (CanLII)[164] I would note that, during the hearing, it was suggested that the Lifestyle andMorality Statement did not prohibit gays and lesbians from working at ChristianHorizons, only that they not engage in homosexual relationships. The implication wasthat the organization did not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. In hisclosing argument, I did not understand counsel for Christian Horizons to be relying onthis argument, and the distinction has been consistently rejected by courts andtribunals. See: Trinity Western, supra; Brockie, supra; Hall (Litigation Guardian of) v.Powers [2002] O.J. No. 1803).[165] The Commission and Ms. Heintz argue that, in order for the Tribunal to find thatthe qualification is reasonable and bona fide, Christian Horizons must meet the threepart test set out in British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v.BCGSEU, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 3, “Meiorin”. They argue that Christian Horizons has failed tomeet the Meiorin test.[166] In Meiorin, the Supreme Court set out a three part test, the “unified approach”,for determining whether a qualification or restriction imposed by an employer constituteda “bona fide occupation qualification.” The three elements of the unified approach are:(1) that the employer adopted the standard for a purposerationally connected to the performance of the job;48