JY was also interested enough in this story to retweet the attached, so JY seems to agree that this case in relevant to their own.
The original case in 2014 was rejected by the Alberta HRC as ‘an imposition on the rights of the parent’, and like you say the decision was confirmed all the way up to the Canadian Supreme Court.
The BC HRC could decide differently, but if the actual courts didn't see a Charter violation in the first instance, I’d hope they’d find against Cyrynowski now.
BUT HRT / HRC work on state laws, not federal laws so it could be that a precedent set in the Alberta HRC probably has no bearing on the BC HRT.
IANAL! this is from reading around.
Another JY cross over in this case:
JCCF who represented the beauticians pro bono is also pro bono representing Todd, the father in this case, against James Cyrynowski.
Apropos of nothing James Cyrynowski has a thread on KF.