“It is also inappropriate for courts rigorously to study and focus on the past practices of claimants in order to determine whether their current beliefs are sincerely held.” Supreme Court of Canada in Syndicat Northcrest 2004 SCC 47 (CanLII), 2004 SCC 47
ARGUMENT -The lower courts erred in defining and assessing the plaintiff – who the defendants admit is a “practicing Christian” – with having “religiosity” and “religious scruples” while failing to make a finding of her Religious Freedom protection. The lower courts erred in: making a finding of faculty’s Academic Freedom rights to assess the sincerity of the plaintiff/students’ religious beliefs; excluding from consideration professor-student power imbalance; the plaintiff/students’ freedom to absent from the Sunday Classes without penalty; and, the plaintiff/students of faiths’ rights to refute and pursue fruitful avenues of religious inquiry and expression.
