| 词条 | Douglas/Kwantlen Faculty Assn v Douglas College |
| 释义 |
|case-name=Douglas/Kwantlen Faculty Assn v Douglas College |full-case-name= |heard-date=May 18, 19, 1989 |decided-date=December 6, 1990 |citations=[1990] 3 S.C.R. 570 |history=on appeal from BC Court of Appeal |ruling= Faculty appeal dismissed |ratio= |SCC=1989-1990 |Majority=La Forest J. |JoinMajority=Dickson C.J. and Gonthier JJ. |Concurrence=Wilson J. |JoinConcurrence=L'Heureux‑Dubé J. |Concurrence2=Sopinka J. |Concurrence3=Cory J. |NotParticipating= |LawsApplied= }}Douglas/Kwantlen Faculty Assn v Douglas College, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 570 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision regarding the jurisdiction of an administrative tribunal. BackgroundDouglas College is a post-secondary school operated by the province of British Columbia as a Crown corporation under the College and Institute Act. The school's collective agreement included a provision for mandatory retirement at age 65. Two professors challenged this provision before the labour arbitration tribunal, claiming it violated the equality rights guarantee under section 15(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The professors argued that the college constituted a public institution and therefore was subject to the Charter, and that the collective agreement constituted "law" within meaning of the Charter. The arbitrator agreed and found that the law violated section 15(1) of the Charter. The school appealed the decision on the grounds that the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to determine the constitutional issue. The British Columbia Court of Appeal found that the tribunal had jurisdiction and upheld the decision of the tribunal. The school appealed the decision in the Supreme Court of Canada. The issues before the Supreme Court were:
Opinion of the CourtJustice La Forest, writing for the majority, dismissed the appeal by the college. The majority held that although a tribunal has the power to treat any invalid law that it may be asked to apply as having no force or effect, it may not necessarily be able to apply the Charter or grant a remedy under section 24(1) of the Charter. A tribunal only has power to the extent that it has been conferred to it by law. See also
External links
4 : Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms case law|Supreme Court of Canada cases|Labour relations in Canada|1990 in Canadian case law |
| 随便看 |
|
开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识，基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识，是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。