By Robert Milton

Judicial Review – Court of King’s Bench of New Brunswick
Case No. MM-148-2025

From the very beginning, I believed something simple: if a government policy affects peoples bodies, livelihoods, and dignity, it should be examined carefully, openly, and honestly. I did not set out to become a whistle-blower. I raised concerns because I believed they mattered, and because I believed that in Canada, raising concerns respectfully would lead to discussion and fairness.

That is not what happened.

The policy at the centre of my case explicitly treated unvaccinated workers differently. It stated in writing that unvaccinated employees would be disciplined, removed from work, and subjected to invasive testing. This was not subtle or hidden. The entire country witnessed it.

Workers were ordered to undergo deep nasal swab testing—a test pushed so far into the nose that people cried and bled. I personally know people who were injured by it. In schools, these tests were not administered by medical professionals. School staff with no medical training were ordered to perform them, including on children. This created coercion, fear, and pain.

The policy targeted a specific group of people based on medical status.
That is discrimination by definition.

From day one, I stood up not just for myself, but for Canadians who were pressured into medical procedures that were still experimental at the time. I was terminated before there was any fully approved vaccine or testing, and at a time when New Brunswick was not in a declared state of emergency.

These are not opinions—they are facts on the record.

At the time I was terminated, both the vaccines and the testing regimes were authorized for emergency use only. There was no fully approved vaccine, and no fully approved testing program. These facts are now part of the court record.

Although my union filed a grievance, the most important parts of my case were never properly presented. Key emails were not brought forward. A witness who could confirm what happened was never called. The employer presented no witnesses at all. No one was required to explain or defend the policy itself.

My termination was eventually ruled unjust. But because the policy was never challenged, that finding did not restore me in any real sense. Instead of compensation, my termination was converted into five months of unpaid leave and made subject to mitigation, meaning no real compensation at all.

I was not asking for damages. I was asking for basic compensation. Unpaid leave and mitigation are unpaid wages. A severance for being forced to retire is basic labour law.

Because the union would not challenge the policy or seek judicial review, I felt forced to retire from my career to break free from its jurisdiction so I could seek justice on my own. I was offered no severance or retirement package.

The Human Rights Commission said I did not establish a prima facie case of discrimination. Yet the policy itself provides that prima facie case. The Province of New Brunswick’s own court filings set out the same facts. Unvaccinated workers were treated differently. The entire country saw it.

At every stage, responsibility was deferred:

• The Province ignored the human rights implications.
• The employer followed the policy.
• The union declined to challenge it.
• The arbitrator treated it as settled.
• The Human Rights Commission declined jurisdiction.
• The court deferred to process.

The judicial review has now been dismissed.

That ruling does not mean the policy was lawful. It does not mean the discrimination did not happen. It means the policy itself was never judged.

After years of proceedings, I was left worse off and then ordered to pay costs. The Province of New Brunswick sought costs against me, and the court granted them. It is important to say this clearly: the union did not seek costs against me, and the Human Rights Commission did not seek costs against me. Only the Province did.

After losing my income, being forced to retire without severance, and exhausting every available process to have the policy examined, I was ordered to pay for trying.

This was never just about me or my family. Every Canadian was affected by these policies. I tried, as one person, to force the issue into the open so it could be properly examined.

I encourage anyone who wants to understand this issue properly to obtain copies of my exhibits and my Book of Authorities from the court. They contain the documentary evidence, timelines, and case law relied upon in this matter.

I am stepping away now due to exhaustion and costs I cannot afford. But I leave the record behind.

My treasures are not material things. They are spiritual things. They are worth far more than money.

The story now belongs to the public.

For more information, please email robertcmilton@live.com