Introducing 

Prezi AI.

Your new presentation assistant.

Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.

Loading…
Transcript

Vriend v. Alberta

By: Ali and Shea

Our Opinion

We agree with the Supreme Court, Vriend shouldn't have been fired for his sexual orientation because it should be protected under section 15.

Charter Involvement

-Sections: 1, 15, and 32 were involved

Section 32

Section 15

Application of Charter

Equality Rights

"Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability."

Case Breakdown

- Section 32 states that the charter applies to all provinces and territories

- It also states that section 15 would not apply if Vriend was suing a person or private institution, because of this Vriend wanted to bring Alberta to court and made a case on the grounds that sexual orientation was excluded from the IRPA

Supreme Court Ruling

-Vriend was being discriminated against due to his sexual orientation which broke Section 15 of The Charter of Rights

- First Hearing was on November 4 1997

-A majority of 7- 1 ruled in favor of Vriend

Section 1

Rulings in the Courts

- Guarantees rights of a person to a certain extent

- Delwin Vriend was employed as a lab assistant at a religous college in Alberta

- Supreme Court stated that the IRPA created inequality on the basis of sexual orientation which violated s. 15

- During Vriend's case they Supreme court of Canada ruled that there was not reasonable cause to limit Vriend's rights

The Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta

- This meant Vriend maintained his rights layed out by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in section 2 and 15

- It was ruled that the IRPA was in violation of s. 15 and was not protected under s. 1

- He was regarded as a great employee and had received promotions and salary increases but was fired when it was discovered that Vriend was gay

- Vriend couldn't make his claim under the Alberta IRPA because it did not include sexual orientation

- Laws regarding sexual orientation and equality were brought into the Legislation

- The court of Queen's Bench of Alberta ruled this was a violation of s. 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and that the college where Vriend worked had also violated s. 15 and couldn't be save under s. 1

-Judgement was reached on on April 2 1998

Alberta Court of Appeal

- The Alberta Court of Appeal ruled against Vriend using s.1 to state reasonable limits against the use of s.15

- Because of this, Vriend appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada

Learn more about creating dynamic, engaging presentations with Prezi