Tag: Trinity Western University

The Supreme Court of Canada has rendered a decision that is an important victory for the promotion of equality, diversity and access to justice in Canada. On June 15, 2018, the Court released the landmark decision, finding that law societies were entitled to deny accreditation to a proposed law school that had discriminatory admissions requirements. The case garnered national attention as it seemingly involved a clash between freedom of religion and the right to equality, values which are central to Canada’s democratic society.

Trinity Western University (“TRU”), a Christian university in British Columbia, submitted a proposal to open a law school that was based in the foundational religious beliefs of evangelical Christianity. Admission to the proposed law school would require that all students and faculty adhere to a community code of conduct, which contained a covenant that effectively denied admission to LGBTQ students. The covenant required TRU students to voluntarily abstain from a number of activities and explicitly prohibited “sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and woman.”

The British Columbia and Ontario law societies voted against accreditation of the school because of the discriminatory nature of the covenant. The school sought judicial review of this decision, claiming that refusal to approve the law school on this basis violated its right to religious freedom under Section 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The majority of the Court found that the law societies’ decision to deny accreditation was reasonable and constituted a proportionate balance between the limitation of religious freedoms under the Charter and the statutory objectives of the decision to refuse approval. The Court found that the infringement of religious rights was minor compared to the discrimination members of the LGBTQ community would face under the covenant.

The Court found that protection of public interest was a valid objective for law societies to consider when making decisions with respect to admission to the legal profession. The Court further accepted that by promoting equality, supporting diversity within the bar, and preventing harm to LGBTQ law students, the law societies were acting in furtherance of the public interest.

In addition to upholding human rights, this decision has broader implications for the promotion of access to justice. A major policy issue experienced by Canadians is the inaccessibility of the legal system. This problem is particularly pronounced among members of historically marginalized groups, including the LGBTQ community.

One explanation for the heightened barriers experienced by certain communities in accessing legal services is their lack of representation within the legal profession. Accordingly, there has been a call from policymakers and accessibility advocates to promote diversity within the bar to ensure that members of disadvantaged groups can assess legal representatives who can identify and respond to their unique needs.
Paul Schabas, treasurer of the Law Society of Ontario, acknowledged this important implication of the decision, stating, “Access to justice is facilitated where clients seeking legal services are able to access a legal profession that is reflective of a diverse population and responsive to diverse needs.”

Ultimately, this decision of Canada’s highest court recognizes that Law Societies, as self-regulating bodies of the legal profession, have an overarching obligation to promote equality and uphold human rights when making decisions involving admission to the profession. As gatekeepers to the legal system, these decision makers must be prepared to take active steps to remove inequitable barriers and ensure all persons have an equal opportunity to pursue a legal education.

For assistance with or legal advice on human rights laws in Toronto, please contact one of our human rights lawyers.

“This article is intended to inform. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.”