Bonna Fide Occupational Requirement

[a330pilotcanada]

Part 8:

analysis as to effectively allow Air Canada to unilaterally "set" the
"normal age of retirement

," contrary to the intentions of Parliament and
the purposes Paragraph 15(1 )(c) of the Act,

D. having chosen to use a statistically-based method of determining the
"normal age of retirement

," failing to narrowly construe the defence or
exception in Paragraph 15(1 )(c) of the Act so as to properly apply the
law to the facts of these complaints in the context of the purposes of
the Act and the intentions of Parliament in enacting the defence or
exception under Paragraph 15(1 )(c);

E

. in misconstruing the proper test required to determine which Canadian
airline pilots are "employees working in positions similar" to the
Applicants;

F in misconstruing the proper test required to determine that age 60 is

"

the normal age of retirement" for "employees working in positions
similar" to the Applicants and/or whether a "normal age of retirement"

for those employees even exists;
G. in concluding that the Respondent Air Canada had discharged its onus
under Paragraph 15(1)(c) of the

Actto demonstrate that age 60 is the

"

normal age of retirement for employees working in positions similar to
the position" of the Applicants;
H. by dismissing the Applicants' complaints, having erroneously found
that Air Canada had discharged its onus under Paragraph 15(1 )(c) of
the Act to demonstrate that age 60 is the "normal age of retirement for
employees working in positions similar to the position" of the
Applicants;

I. by dismissing the complaints

, having previously directed that
constitutional issue be addressed after the conclusion of dealing with
the issues in s. 15(1 )(c), s. 15(1 )(a) and s. 15(2) of the Act, and
J. such further and other grounds as counsel shall advise and this
Honourable Court shall permit.

15.

The Applicants plead and rely on:
A. Sections 18 and 18.1 of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C. 1985,

c. F

-7, as amended;
B. Rules 300 and 317 of the Federal Court Rules, SOR/98-106;

C. Paragraph 15(1 )(c) of the

Canadian Human Rights Act, and
D. Such further and other statutes as counsel may advise and as this
Honourable Court may permit.

- 5 -

[a330pilotcanada]

Part 9:

17.

This application will be supported by the following material:
A. a supporting affidavit on behalf of the Applicants served and filed in
accordance with Rule 306;

B. the relevant documentary exhibits and written submissions that
were before the Tribunal

; and
C. such further and other evidence as counsel may advise and this
Honourable Court may permit.

Respectfully submitted this 6th day of September, 2011

Raymond . Hall
Barrister & Solicitor

2226 West Taylor Boulevard
Winnipeg

, MB
R3P 2J5
Tel. : [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-Mail: ray[email protected]

Counsel for the Applicants

- 6

[777longhaul]

On the www.flypast60.com website today:

Lufthansa Pilots Win Age 60 Case at EU Court of Justice BBC Report

The decision is reported on EU Court of Justice web site

(Case C-447/09: Prigge and Others ).

A PDF copy of the decision has been placed on our web site.


Thwaites: Air Canada's Notice of Application, Judicial Review

Thwaites: Complainants' Notice of Application, Judicial Review

Thwaites: 2011 CHRT 11