Human Rights

Ontario Human Rights Tribunal finds co-op failed to address harassment; awards $30,000 to victims

April 12th, 2016 by Shelina Ali

The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario has released a lengthy 87 page decision in which it found Rouge Valley Co‑operative Homes and its board of directors did not appropriately respond to a campaign of harassment against 10 of its members. It awarded $3,000 to each of the 10 members/applicants in the case as “compensation for the infringement of their right to be free from discrimination and harassment in the occupation of accommodation, including injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect.”

This decision sets out some very clear expectations for housing co‑op Boards in dealing with issues of harassment and discrimination contrary to the Code. Volunteer board members should take note of the Tribunal’s expectations around how responsive and communicative a volunteer board of directors should be when dealing with these issues.

Continue reading “Ontario Human Rights Tribunal finds co-op failed to address harassment; awards $30,000 to victims”

Ontario Human Rights Tribunal awards $30,000 in compensation to several housing co‑op members

March 10th, 2016 by Shelina Ali

The Ontario Human Rights Tribunal released an 87 page decision last week awarding the ten applicants, all members of a Scarborough housing co‑operative, $30,000 in compensation.   The applicants each brought applications against the housing co‑operative and its board of directors for failing to address harassing conduct towards the applicants by another member of the housing co‑operative. While the board members and co‑operative did not engage in the harassment, the Tribunal found that it was still liable for failing to address the conduct.

We are still awaiting the release of the decision, and will write more about the Tribunal’s findings once it’s available.  News coverage of the decision can be found here.

 

Service animals for mental health: An emerging issue in disability law

January 28th, 2016 by Katie Douglas

What to do with Peaches? In 2014, a woman moved in with her common‑law partner in Barrie, Ontario and, while aware that the condominium’s bylaws restricted owners from having dogs over 25 pounds, proceeded to move in with her 40‑pound retriever cross, Peaches. The property manager demanded that she remove the dog and the owner responded with a request for accommodation under the Ontario Human Rights Code, claiming that Peaches was a service dog who supported her with “stress and past abuse issues.” Ultimately, the court evicted Peaches, ruling that the owner had not provided sufficient information about her disability to establish that Peaches was a necessary accommodation.

This case highlights an emerging issue in disability law. Continue reading “Service animals for mental health: An emerging issue in disability law”

Because it’s 2015: Calling for gender equality in the legal profession

December 17th, 2015 by Celia Chandler

This post was first published on rabble.ca

“Because it’s 2015″…

was the freshly minted PM’s response to the question, “why gender parity in the cabinet?” And good on him. I think we can all agree that equality of numbers is a start and can set a tone for the rest of society.

I’ve been reminded a few times lately that Justin’s tone of sunny ways regarding gender parity is sadly lacking in the legal profession. Continue reading “Because it’s 2015: Calling for gender equality in the legal profession”

Ending discrimination against First Nations children in Canada

February 26th, 2015 by Priya Sarin

In February 2007, a human rights complaint was filed by the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society (the “Caring Society”) and the Assembly of First Nations (“AFN”) against the Government of Canada, alleging that the government discriminated against First Nations children by providing inequitable child welfare services to children living on-reserve as compared to children living off-reserve (First Nations Child).

In particular, the First Nations Child complaint alleges that the federal government’s program underfunds children living on-reserve, such that children do not receive needed care and support that would permit them to continue to live at home and, as a result, First Nations children are disproportionately removed from their families in comparison to non‑First Nations children. The impact of the child welfare system on First Nations communities has been compared to the legacy created by the residential school system.

Read more on rabble.ca

AODA updates 2015 – will you comply?

October 14th, 2014 by Lauren Blumas

Summer is over and 2015 is around the corner. As the calendar flips over into the New Year, most organizations will be subject to additional requirement under Ontario’s Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 (the AODA) via the Integrated Accessibility Standards Regulation (the Regulation).

The Regulation applies to “every organization that provides goods, services or facilities to the public or other third parties and that has at least one employee”. The application is intended to be broad and indeed captures most of our clients.

Continue reading “AODA updates 2015 – will you comply?”