Thibodeau v. Canada (Public Services and Procurement), 2024 FC 1902
[...]
[5] In 2019, Mr. Thibodeau filed a series of 13 complaints with the Commissioner against PSPC regarding unilingual and/or predominantly English signage
[...]
[6] The 13 complaints involved sites which PSPC managed and on which it was responsible for ensuring that signage was in both official languages and of equal quality at all times, in particular Parliament Hill (six complaints), the Confederation Building (one complaint), the Library and Archives Canada building and the C.D. Howe Building (three complaints), and L’Esplanade Laurier building (three complaints). The signage in question primarily addressed health, safety and security on the premises, and traffic
[...]
[39] Having considered the matter, however, I need not address all the issues raised by the parties. For the purposes of my determination, I will assume not only that PSPC failed to comply with its language obligations under the Act with respect of all 13 complaints identified by Mr. Thibodeau, but also that such breaches resulted in Mr. Thibodeau’s language rights being violated; thus a breach of a right is considered established in line with the test in Ward. However, not only do I find that damages will not serve the functions of compensation, vindication of the right, and/or deterrence of future breaches, but more importantly, PSPC has convinced me that countervailing factors, being the circumstances of this case, defeat the functional considerations that support a damage award and render damages inappropriate or unjust. I also consider, as did Justice Grammond in St. John’s International Airport Authority at paragraphs 88, 101 and 102 – but for different reasons – that the awarding of declaratory relief would add nothing and thus be unnecessary given, again, the surrounding circumstances which lead to Mr. Thibodeau discovering the breaches.
[...]
[41] In the circumstances, and on Mr. Thibodeau’s best arguable case in his favour, that all 13 complaints in question constitute a breach of PSPC’s language obligations under the Act and that each breach corresponds to a violation of his language rights, I exercise my discretion to not award him any of the remedies that he seeks.
