Skip To Content
Contact Donate Site Map

Paper – Comparing the Incomparable in Human Rights Claims: Moore Guidance, 2013

Paper presented at the Ontario Bar Association’s 2013 Annual Human Rights Update: Keeping on Top of Key Developments Part II.

This paper focuses on the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Moore v. British Columbia (Ministry of Education) and the use of a strict comparative analysis when framing and adjudicating statutory human rights claims.

In this paper, ARCH provides a brief history of the analyses used both in the Charter and statutory human rights frameworks. ARCH also provides a review of the Moore and First Nations Child and Family Caring Society decisions, several decisions released prior to Moore which demonstrate the devastating effects of importing a strict comparator analysis into statutory human rights adjudication, and a small sampling of recent decisions from the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) following the Moore decision where comparative elements exist. Lastly, ARCH argues that a comparator analysis is particularly problematic in duty to accommodate disability cases.

Available in PDF and RTF formats.

Comparing the Incomparable in Human Rights Claims: Moore Guidance (07-06-13)

Last Modified: August 1, 2019

Sign Up for ARCH Updates

Don't have an email address?
Updates on ARCH activities and events.
Posts that explore topics on disability law, legal practice, and anything in between.
ARCH Alert
Quarterly newsletter with news and information on disability issues and updates on ARCH work.