Summary: HRTO Decision in Swain v. MBM Intellectual Property Law LLP
August 10, 2015 - Summary: HRTO Decision in Swain v. MBM Intellectual Property Law LLP
The OHRC uses targeted legal action, including Public Interest Inquiries, to advance an expansive interpretation of the Code, establish important precedents that adopt OHRC policies, promote broader public change, and pursue public interest remedies. Some of our most recent case work can be found below. Each Annual Report also reviews the past year’s legal work.
The OHRC's Litigation and inquiry strategy sets out when and how the OHRC decides to conduct an inquiry or take an application to the Human Rights Tribunal or when to intervene in a legal proceeding.
To request a Commission initiated-application, inquiry or intervention, contact info@ohrc.on.ca.
See our Litigation and Inquiry Strategy for more information about OHRC legal action.
August 10, 2015 - Summary: HRTO Decision in Swain v. MBM Intellectual Property Law LLP
Toronto – The Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) is intervening in Roberts v. Toronto Police Services Board, an application before the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) that raises the issues of racial profiling and discriminatory use of force.
October 23, 2018 - The Court of Appeal for Ontario granted the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) leave to intervene in the appeal of Corporation of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) v Canada, a constitutional challenge to the administrative segregation provisions of the federal Corrections and Conditional Release Act.
Engaging with the public: the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) received significant input from the public, and analyzed both quantitative and qualitative data.
Why an inquiry? On October 3, 2019, the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) began a public inquiry into whether students with reading disabilities have meaningful access to education as required under the Ontario Human Rights Code (Code).
the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) released Building on the Legacy: Collaboration, Action and Accountability Towards an Inclusive Society, its 2022–2023 annual report.
TORONTO – Today, in a landmark decision – Ontario (Health) v Association of Ontario Midwives – the Court of Appeal for Ontario confirmed the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario’s decision that Ontario midwives experienced gender-based discrimination and should be compensated equitably to eliminate the gender wage gap.
Two public interest inquiries by the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) will explore if new rental housing licensing bylaws in North Bay and Waterloo create discriminatory barriers to rental housing. The inquiries are being conducted under the OHRC’s Human Rights Code mandate to promote, advance and protect human rights in Ontario.
From: Policy on competing human rights
While the courts have not set a clear formula or analytical approach for dealing with competing rights, they have provided some guidance. Where rights appear to be in conflict, Charter principles require decision-makers to try to “reconcile” both sets of rights.
From: Policy on competing human rights
Adler v. Ontario, [1996] 3 S.C.R. 609
Alberta v. Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony, 2009 SCC 37
Assn. of Justices of the Peace of Ontario v. Ontario (Attorney General) (2008), 92 O.R. (3d) 16
B. (R.) v. Children’s Aid Society of Metropolitan Toronto, [1995] 1 S.C.R. 315
Bothwell v. Ontario (Minister of Transportation), 2005 CanLII 1066 (ON S.C.D.C.)
Bou Malhab v. Diffusion Métromédia CMR Inc., [2011] 1 S.C.R. 214
Toronto – A significant decision from the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) in XY v. Ministry of Government and Consumer Services reinforces the human rights of trans people. The decision found that legislation requiring a person to have “transsexual surgery” before they can change the sex designation on their birth registration is discriminatory.
June 2006 - Over the past ten years, the Commission has been involved in 72 judicial review decisions, 32 decisions on appeal at the Divisional Court, 40 decisions from the Court of Appeal, and 17 from the Supreme Court of Canada. As of March 31, 2006, the Commission was litigating 462 cases at the Tribunal, eight cases before the Divisional Court, three in the Ontario Court of Appeal, and two before the Supreme Court of Canada.
March 2012 - The OHRC will focus its comments on the issues and barriers identified in the CRSAO’s reports that connect to the OHRC’s current priority initiatives dealing with racism experienced by Aboriginal people and other groups as well as disability, especially mental health discrimination.
May 2012 - What follows is a discussion of significant legal decisions dealing with religious and creed rights in Canada. The focus is on decisions made since the Commission issued its 1996 Policy on Creed and the Accommodation of religious observances. It does not review every decision, but those that may be important from a human rights perspective. In addition to a description of the case law, trends and areas where it is anticipated the case law will continue to evolve or be clarified are identified. The review will form the basis for further research and dialogue concerning the law in Canada as it relates to this significant area of human rights.
June 28, 2012 - We’ve spent the past several months looking at the findings from our province-wide policy consultation on the human rights issues experienced by people with mental health disabilities and addictions. The report is scheduled for release in September 2012. (Volume no.2 No. 1.)
From: Annual Report 2011-2012 - Human rights: the next generation
The OHRC intervened at the Federal Court in Seeley v. CN, a judicial review of a decision of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. The Tribunal had found that CN discriminated against Ms. Seeley by requiring her to relocate without considering her obligations as a parent. The Court has not yet released its decision.
Toronto – The Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) has made a formal request to the Ontario Municipal Board to intervene in the Lynwood Charlton Centre’s appeal of a decision by the City of Hamilton. This step is based on the OHRC’s concerns about human rights issues when the City denied Lynwood Charlton the zoning required to move housing for eight teenage girls with mental health issues.
The central issue in this appeal is the apparent conflict between the intersecting religious and equality rights of a witness and the fair trial rights of the accused in the context of a criminal proceeding. The OHRC’s submissions set out a process, based in existing case law, to analyze and reconcile potentially competing rights. The proposed process can apply, with appropriate modifications, to any competing rights claims whether they arise under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the Charter), human rights legislation, the common law or otherwise.
On August 13th, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario released its decision on a human rights application, R.C. v. District School Board of Niagara.