2. FAMILY

B. Same Sex Benefits

Leading Cases

Leshner v. Ontario (No. 2) (1992), 16 C.H.R.R. D/184 (Ont. Bd.Inq.)

http://www.hrcr.org/safrica/equality/leshner_ontario.html

Legislation providing that only married opposite-sex partners are entitled to pension benefits is unconstitutional.

Canada (Attorney General) v. Mossop, [1993] 1 S.C.R. 554

http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/1993/1993scc21.html

Mossop was denied bereavement leave by his employer. Decision of Human Rights tribunal was upheld because same sex couples were not entitled to bereavement leave.

Egan v. Canada, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 513

http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/1995/1995scc49.html

Denial of benefits for same sex couples does not violate s.15(1). If it did violate s.15(1) it would be justified under s.1.

Rosenberg v. Canada (Attorney General) (1995), 25 O.R. (3d) 612

http://www.egale.ca/index.asp?lang=E&menu=61&item=438

Application to have the definition of spouse under the Income Tax Act changed so that the decision of Leshner v. Ontario could be implemented. The Court found that the definition of spouse violated section 15(1) but was saved under s.1.

Vriend v. Alberta, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 4

http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/1998/1998scc30.html

Sexual orientation was recognised as a ground of discrimination covered by section 15(1) of the Charter.