Court of Appeal

CASE NO.                                                  VOLUME                                                          PAGE

Cite as: Nova Scotia (Finance) v. Hodder, 1998 NSCA 86

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN in the right of the

PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA represented by the

MINISTER OF FINANCE                                                                                                                

(Appellant)                                                                                                                                        

- and  -

WILSON HODDER, NOVA SCOTIA HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

and PATRICK J. DUNCAN, Q.C., a Board a Board of Inquiry appointed

pursuant to Section 32A(a) of the Human Rights Act, R.S.N.S. 1989,

c. 214, as amended

(Respondents)

C.A.  No.  144161                                    Halifax, N.S.                                         CHIPMAN, J.A.

                                                                                                                               (orally)

APPEAL HEARD:                                        March 26, 1998

JUDGMENT DELIVERED:              March 26, 1998

WRITTEN RELEASE OF ORAL:                March 31, 1998

SUBJECT:           Civil Rights - Human Rights Act, R.S.N.S. 1989, c. 214, as amended

SUMMARY:         A complaint was made under the Human Rights Act that the appellant discriminated against the complainant in the provision of services contrary to s. 5(1)(a) of the Human Rights Act in the exclusion of same sex partners from the term “spouse” as used in the Public Service Superannuation Act, R.S.C. c. 377.  A Board of Inquiry appointed by the Human Rights Commission resolved a number of preliminary issues raised respecting its jurisdiction to hear the complaint. 

ISSUE:                 The appellant contended that the Board erred in its decision resolving the preliminary motions relating to its jurisdiction.

RESULT:  The Court of Appeal held that for the reasons given by it in Workers’ Compensation Board (N.S.) v. O’Quinn (1995), 147 N.S.R. (2d) 28, the administration by the appellants of the pension and other benefits at issue was capable of being considered the provision of services or facilities within the meaning of s. 5(1)(a) of the Human Rights Act.  The Board, therefore, had jurisdiction to proceed with the Inquiry into the complaints before it.  It was not necessary to resolve other issues raised.  The appeal was dismissed without costs.