Well, I was certainly counsel for the Alberta Civil Liberties Association. The factum that we filed with the Supreme Court of Canada was to indicate that the case of Vriend was against the government of the province of Alberta at that time, to say that the Alberta Human Rights Act did not have the words “sexual orientation” as a ground in that act. So if Mr. Vriend had a complaint of discrimination, he was unable to access the Alberta Human Rights Commission. So then the Supreme Court of Canada read the words “sexual orientation” into the act. Of course, in the last version of the Alberta Human Rights Act, which is now the Alberta Citizenship and Multiculturalism Act, the words “sexual orientation” appear there, but until then it was not there.
Now, the Vriend case does not deal with whether Vriend was discriminated against by King's College. Vriend worked in the computer laboratory for King's College and was asked what his sexual orientation was. He told them and then he was dismissed.
Certainly that was the role I played as counsel for the Alberta Civil Liberties Association, to submit a brief to say that the legislation was under-inclusive.