Professor Dobson is 65 and, under the mandatory retirement policy of his university, must retire next July 1^st. He does not wish to do so.
a. Discuss whether he can bring a Charter action against the university.
b. Assuming he can bring a Charter action against the university, what would his argument be, and how would the university answer it?

a. It is unclear as yet whether a university is a government body, and therefore subject under s. 32 to compliance with the Charter. If it is not, then the Charter is not a possible protection for him. If his province has a Human Rights Code that forbids employment discrimination on the basis of age, he could use that. If it allows discrimination against those over 65, he could try a Charter challenge against the Code. If it is, then he may do so.
b. If he could bring a Charter action, he would show that the mandatory retirement policy interfered with his right under s. 15(1) not to be discriminated against on the basis of age. It would then be up to the Crown, acting for the Government, to show that the retirement policy was either justified under s. 1 of the Charter or passed under a s. 33(1) declaration. If it could not prove this on the balance of probabilities, Professor Dobson would have succeeded in showing his rights had been infringed by the policy, and the Charter, being the supreme law of Canada, would cause the policy to have no force or effect.