The majority allowed Mike Ward's appeal under Quebec's discrimination framework. Four judges dissented, and the decision did not determine every possible civil claim from the jokes.
The dispute involved Mike Ward, a professional comedian, used jokes about Jérémy Gabriel, a young singer with a disability, in a stage show and online video between 2010 and 2013. The Quebec human rights commission pursued discrimination proceedings under the Quebec Charter. The Tribunal awarded damages, and the majority of the Quebec Court of Appeal largely upheld its ruling. The Supreme Court heard Ward's appeal.
The central question was Whether the Quebec human rights tribunal had jurisdiction under sections 4 and 10 of the Quebec Charter to find discriminatory impairment of dignity from a professional comedian's offensive speech about a public figure, in light of freedom of expression under section 3 and section 9.1.
The majority held that a claim under section 10 requires differential treatment connected with a prohibited ground and impairment of the equal exercise or recognition of a protected right. The Tribunal had found Ward targeted Gabriel because he was a public figure, not because of his disability. Offensive speech and subjective emotional harm do not alone establish the requisite discriminatory impact. The majority separated the discrimination jurisdiction from civil defamation claims and set an objective contextual approach. The four dissenting justices would have dismissed the appeal and disagreed with the majority's application of equality and dignity protections.
Disposition: Appeal allowed by a 5–4 majority, with Abella, Karakatsanis, Martin and Kasirer JJ. dissenting. The majority concluded the statutory discrimination elements had not been established.
Primary source: Supreme Court of Canada, Ward v. Quebec (Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse), 2021 SCC 43. Full official reasons.