Subseries 3 - Ontario Human Rights Commission Hearings

0.8 m of textual records

From 1977, when I was first appointed to hear cases arising under the Ontario Human Rights Act, until 1995, when I was not re-appointed, I had at least 15 cases. Many of them were settled before a hearing. The cases covered a wide range of prohibited grounds of discrimination. Indeed, in looking over the files I see that all the prohibited grounds were at least touched on in the cases. The prohibited grounds are set out in section 1 of the Ontario Human Rights Code, 1981, which states: “Every person has a right to equal treatment with respect to services, goods and facilities, without discrimination because of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, age, marital status, family status or handicap.

I will mention here only the cases that involved a substantial hearing. The Kellerman case involved discrimination on the basis of handicap which I believe was the first such case under the Code (files 24-26). The Michipicoten case involved sex and marital status (files 11-16). The Peel Non-profit Housing case involved discrimination on the basis of receipt of public assistance (a new ground) (files 28-41). The Barnard and Commissionaires case involved nationality, ancestry and place of origin (files 18-22). The Metro Toronto Golf Course case involved race, colour and nationality (files 6-10). The

Sudbury Police case involved race, colour, ancestry and age (files 44-46). And the Catholic Children’s Aid Society case involved race, colour and creed (file 27). Some excellent counsel, such as Brendan O’Brien and John Sopinka, appeared in the cases.

Open