Heintz v. Christian Horizons
November 3, 2009
CCCC is an intervener in Heintz v. Christian Horizons. An intervener generally provides additional arguments to the court where the outcome of the decision will have broader application than just between the parties. The appeal will be argued December 15 to 17, 2009.
The basis of the CCCC argument is the ability of an organization to have a religious identity. If able to be identified religiously, does the organization have the ability to hire employees in accordance with that identity and to maintain the identity when serving the public? The constitutional argument is: we know individuals have religious freedom in accordance with Section 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Do groups also have religious freedom? In the recent case of Alberta v. Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony , 2009 SCC 37, the Supremem Court of Canada acknowledged that the Charter protects both individual and group rights.
Several CCCC members have inquired whether changes in human resource policies are necessary. At this time no change is required, although voluntary changes are always within the discretion of each organization. Until all legal appeals are exhausted, the decision is held in abeyance. This means the decision has no force or effect until the final appeal has been rendered. The final appeal is anticipated to eventually be to the Supreme Court of Canada. CCCC will keep members advised of each stage in the proceedings.
