Cynthia Maughan | Maughan v. UBC Case Record – The public court filings, Supreme Court of Canada and official case records.

At the Supreme Court of Canada, Cynthia Maughan v University of British Columbia: [Christian Academic Freedom in Canadian Universities and Colleges]

Quoted from the Supreme Court of Canada website:

🏛️ Supreme Court of Canada Case Record

Filing Reference: Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch), Leave to Appeal Docket No. 33495

Summary

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Charter – Provincial civil rights – Torts – Courts – Evidence – Universities – Charter applicability – Freedom of Religion – Equality rights – Whether Charter applicable in university context – Whether Charter values applicable to provincially protected civil rights – Whether tort arising from prohibited conduct of promoting hatred or inferiority on basis of religion – Whether university owed duty of care – Whether absolute immunity in a university’s quasi-judicial proceeding of a student grade appeal – Effect of lower courts’ failure to refer to mcuh of the plaintiff’s direct evidence on the critical issues – Whether alleged error brings the judiciary into disrepute.

Ms. Maughan, an unrepresented litigant, unsuccessfully appealed through UBC’s academic appeal system the grade received from Dr. Weir in a graduate course in literary criticism and brought an action in the Supreme Court of British Columbia pursuant to Civil Rights Protection Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 49 (arising from prohibited discriminatory and harmful treatment on the basis of her Christian belief), and in negligence (arising from the professor’s alleged bad faith). She had joined a debate on a graduate student “list serv” before the seminar began, stated her view that an opinion expressed there reflected a disrespectful stereotyping of Christians and, when the class decided to hold a Sunday colloquium at the author’s home, declined to attend. Ms. Maughan emailed Dr. Weir twice, asking if it were possible to ask the class if the colloquium needed to be on a Sunday, but she did not mention her religion or her religious observances as a reason. Ms. Maughan attached her colloquium presentation paper to an email; the paper, through oversight, was marked at the end of term. The professor’s comments on the paper noted that “the seminar challenged everything you hold dear” and mentioned that “your agenda of resistance” made it even more difficult to assess in the context of overall performance in the course.

Corrections to Internet Commentary

Misrepresentation 1: The Student’s claims of institutional wrongdoing were groundless.

The Documented Fact: The UBC Senate Appeals Committee found that the Department of English mounted an unseemly attack on the student in response to her “Holy Day Observance without Penalty” appeal that “descended well beneath the current standards of Charter values.”

Misrepresentation 2: The litigation was about a B- grade.

The Documented Fact: The official records show the case was a matter of principle regarding student religious accommodation. The instructor assessed the known Christian student’s work as an “agenda of resistance” in marking her overall grade.

Misrepresentation 3: The Plaintiff sought $18m for personal enrichment.

The Documented Fact: The pre-trial signed 2007 Amended Statement of Claim removed all specified dollar amounts. The court transcripts verify that the student plaintiff asked the court, pee the Civil Rights Protection Act, to direct any award to a Student Religious Freedom Fund.

Counsel:

Counsel for the Faculty: Joseph J. Arvay, O.C.,O.B.C, Q.C. and Bruce Elwood

Counsel for the University: Thomas A. Roper, Q.C. and Jennifer Russell

The Applicant: Cynthia Maughan, M.A., Self-represented, English Student

Joseph Arvay, O.C., O.B.C, Q.C.,considered the best public law lawyer in Canada, fighting multiple landmark cases before the Supreme Court of Canada, died suddenly on December 7, 2020. Although I didn’t know him except in an adversarial role over the years that this case went on, he was always respectful. Only God can judge our hearts.

KEY DOCUMENTS in APPELLANT-STUDENT [Cynthia Maughan] LEAVE TO APPEAL to the SUPREME COURT OF CANADA

Leave to Appeal ARGUMENT

Statement of FACTS

LEGAL QUESTIONS Asked to be Resolved at SCC

REPLY to UBC and Faculty Responses to Leave to Appeal Argument

MOTION to Adduce New Evidence

REPLY TO MOTION to Adduce New Evidence

[Cynthia Maughan] ARGUMENT

Argument: Leave to Appeal Argument

PDF Argument – Appeal to be Heard at the Supreme Court of Canada HTML Argument – Appeal to be Heard at the Supreme Court of Canada PART III

FACTS

KEY FACTS: The “practicing Christian” [Cynthia Maughan] Plaintiff student:

PDF Facts – Appeal to be Head at the Supreme Court of Canada Part I HTML Facts – Appeal to be Heard at the Supreme Court of Canada Part I

[Cynthia Maughan] LEGAL QUESTIONS ASKED OF SCC

Key QUESTIONS Asked to be Resolved by the Supreme Court of Canada:

PDF Questions Asked – Appeal to be Heard at the Supreme Court of Canada Part II HTML Questions – Appeal to be Heard at the Supreme Court of Canada.Parts I-III Above Scanned Originals

REPLIES to Respondent University and Faculty

[Cynthia Maughan] REPLY to the University and Faculty’s SCC submissions

The Appellant-Student is on the Dean’s List and in Top 15% of UBC Students

Specific References to Distinctions Between “Religion” v “Religiousity”

“Religious Scruples” Made in Lower Courts Outlined (Scanned)

Reply to UBC and Faculty Responses (Scanned)

[Cynthia Maughan] MOTION TO ADDUCE NEW EVIDENCE

MOTION to Adduce New Evidence: Pattern of Faculty Association Contriving Complaints to Garner Faculty and Legal Resources Against Practising Christians