Language selector

Legal

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.

  1. Human Rights settlement reached with Ministry of Education on Safe Schools - Terms of settlement

    WHEREAS on July 7, 2005, the OHRC initiated a complaint, number GKEA-6DUH6W, pursuant to subsection 32(2) of the Human Rights Code in the public interest and on behalf of racialized students and students with disabilities alleging that the application of the safe schools provisions of the Education Act and the Ministry’s and school boards’ policies on discipline are having a disproportionate impact on racial minority students and students with disabilities. NOW THEREFORE, the Parties agree to settle these matters as follows:

  2. Backgrounder - Tribunal finds Falun Gong a protected creed under Ontario's Human Rights Code

    Western scholars of religion would characterize Falun Gong as a new religious movement. The essence of Falun Gong is spiritual elevation. Falun Gong practitioners believe in the existence of gods and divine beings in the cosmos. Its leader, Li Hongzhi, has written a form of ‘scripture.‘ His message is profoundly moral.

  4. Case summaries

    From: Discussion paper: Human rights issues in insurance

    (Extracts from CHRR)

    Discriminatory auto insurance rates allowed for bona fide reasons

    Zurich Insurance Co. v. Ontario (Human Rights Comm.)

    The majority of the Supreme Court of Canada finds that Zurich Insurance did not discriminate against Michael Bates contrary to the Ontario Human Rights Code by charging him higher premiums for automobile insurance because of his age, sex, and marital status.

  5. Appendices

    From: Consultation report: Human rights issues in insurance

    List of Acronyms

    Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association (CLHIA)

    Canadian Loss Experience Rating System (CLEAR)

    Canadian Standards Association (CSA)

    Coalition for Fair and Just Treatment of Ontarians (CFJTO)

    Financial Services Commission of Ontario (FSCO)

    HIV-AIDS Legal Clinic of Ontario (HALCO)

    Independent Financial Brokers of Canada (IFBC)
    (Formerly the Independent Life Insurance Brokers of Canada and the Independent Financial Services Brokers of Canada)

    Insurance Bureau of Canada (IBC)

  6. The move towards an intersectional approach

    From: An intersectional approach to discrimination: Addressing multiple grounds in human rights claims

    Multiple grounds in equality and human rights jurisprudence

    Some courts and tribunals have started to acknowledge the need to make special provision for discrimination based on multiple grounds and to recognize the social, economic and historical context in which it takes place. However, despite these advancements, the courts’ understanding of a proper intersectional approach is still in its infancy. What follows is a discussion of recent cases in which a move towards a multiple grounds or intersectional analysis is evidenced in either a majority or dissenting opinion.

  7. Section III: The balancing tools

    From: Balancing conflicting rights: Towards an analytical framework

    This section of the paper surveys the balancing tools found in the Code and relevant case law. Documents such as Commission briefing notes and Policy Papers provide invaluable commentary on these tools and their insights are woven into the following discussion. The goal of this section is to identify the resources for balancing conflicting rights that will be utilized in the scenarios discussed in Section IV.

  8. Housing

    From: Human rights and the family in Ontario

    The ground of family status was added to the Code in 1982. Until 1986, the Code contained an exception permitting residential buildings or parts of residential buildings to be designated as adult only. Unlike in the areas of employment and services, there has been significant litigation regarding family status issues in the area of housing, particularly in the Ontario context.

  11. Setting new standards for defining discrimination

    From: Annual Report 2010-2011: Looking back, moving forward

    Preventing discrimination is at the heart of the Ontario Human Rights Code. The courts and tribunals continue to clarify what this means. One example is a landmark ruling in September 2010.

    In Tranchemontagne v. the Ministry of Community and Social Services, the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld a lower court ruling that two alcoholics were entitled to disability benefits. This case looked at what constituted discrimination in human rights law.

  12. Rental housing licensing Inquiries

     

    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.

  14. Appendix F: Table of cases

    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

  15. Commission appeals advance human rights law (fact sheet)

    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.

  16. Ontario Human Rights Commission Submission regarding Interim Reports of the Commission for the Review of Social Assistance in Ontario

    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.

  18. Creed case law review

    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.

  20. In the courts: family status and sex discrimination case

    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.

Pages