Court dismisses case against McMaster
Four students had asked for religious exemptions from its COVID-19 vaccine requirements
A judicial review of McMaster University’s COVID-19 vaccination policy has been dismissed in divisional court after the institution’s mandate was challenged by four students.
The students — both graduate and undergraduate — had requested COVID-19 vaccine exemptions from the university, noting “the use of fetal cell lines in the production or testing of the vaccines” as their common reasoning, which they considered “immoral and contrary to their religious faith.”
McMaster had denied their requests, noting the argument concerning fetal cell tissue is “an insufficient basis” as no vaccine available contains cells from an aborted fetus. The university also removed the students from their programs and semesters for not abiding by the COVID-19 vaccine mandate on campus.
The issue was taken to divisional court earlier this year. Since then, McMaster announced its vaccine policy would be “paused” from May 1 until the end of summer term.
Siding with the university in its ruling last week, the court said that the “process created by the university was fair,” and students were obliged “to put their best foot forward.”
While suggesting that the court sees “little merit in the procedural fairness argument raised by the applicants (students),” the case was dismissed on the grounds of it being the wrong venue for the issue.
“This is a claim that should be made to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario at first instance, and not to this court,” the ruling said. The court noted that although it can carry out a judicial review of the decisions “through the lens of reasonableness,” it is not what the applicants are seeking.
The students, at first, were initially seeking a broader set of reliefs including declaring McMaster’s vaccine mandate beyond the powers of the administration, and declaring the university’s decision a violation of their rights under the Human Rights Code and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Later, the relief motion was narrowed down to a judicial review request claiming breach of “duty of fairness” toward them, and that McMaster’s decisions “were unreasonable.” It asked the court to quash the university’s decision, and allow the students back in their programs.
The court, however, dismissed the case, adding that it cannot make a decision when “there is another process available to the applicants,” redirecting them to the Human
Rights Tribunal of Ontario.
Employment lawyer Ed Canning told The Spectator the case would take at least two to three years if it was to be heard there, pointing to the underfunded and understaffed nature of the Human Rights Tribunal.
McMaster told The Spectator that it is encouraged by the outcome of the case. “The decision supports the university’s prioritization of the health and safety of the university community which has guided McMaster decisions throughout the pandemic.”
Other organizations, like the City of Hamilton, also have mandatory vaccine policies. In April, Hamilton city council voted to keep its COVID-19 vaccine mandate in place, which means city employees who don’t comply will lose their jobs June 1.
This is a claim that should be made to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario at first instance, and not to this court.
DIVISIONAL COURT RULING