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.
April 2009 - The goal of this report is to identify the progress of the commitments made by 22 organizations across Ontario in response to the Ontario Human Rights Commission’s (“Commission”) Inquiry into Assaults on Asian Canadian Anglers. From these commitments, best practices can be drawn. The Commission has also been monitoring any further incidents, and a description of these is provided.
The Ontario Court of Appeal has upheld a lower court ruling that two alcoholics are entitled to disability benefits. The case is important because it looks at what constitutes discrimination in human rights law.
Toronto – The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario has ruled that newspaper editorials are not covered by Ontario’s Human Rights Code. The Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) intervened in this case, Whiteley v. Osprey Media Publishing Inc. and Sun Media Corporation before the Tribunal. The OHRC argued that section 13 of the Code does not restrict newspapers from printing opinions that some people may not like. The Tribunal agreed, saying “…publication of opinion in the media is a matter at the core of freedom of expression and freedom of the press in a democratic society”.
Factum of the intervener Ontario Human Rights Commission.
From: Discussion paper: Human rights issues in insurance
From: Discussion paper: Human rights issues in insurance
(Extracts from CHRR)
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.
From: An intersectional approach to discrimination: Addressing multiple grounds in human rights claims
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.
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.
From: Human rights and the family in Ontario
From: "Next Stop, Accessibility" Report on the public transit stop announcements in Ontario
The Ontario Human Rights Commission (the “Commission”) has long been concerned about the significant barriers that persons with disabilities face when attempting to access transportation services.
From: Policy on human rights and rental housing
|
A. v. Colloredo-Mansfeld (No. 3) (1994), 23 CHRR D/328 (Ont. Bd. Inq.) |
|
Ahmed v. 177061 Canada Ltd. (2002), 43 CHRR D/379 (Ont. Bd. Inq.) |
|
Alcoholism Foundation of Manitoba v. Winnipeg (City of), (Man. C.A.), (1990), 69 D.L.R. (4th) 697 |
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.
This document explains the legal backdrop for the Commission’s Policy Framework. It is divided into two main sections. The first provides an overview and summary of key legal principles from some significant legal decisions. This section aims to help readers understand the relevant legal background when seeking to conciliate or otherwise reconcile competing rights claims. The second part of the document surveys the leading cases that deal with competing rights. It also provides examples of situations where the leading cases, and the key principles from them, have been applied by courts and tribunals. It is divided by the types of rights conflicts that most commonly arise. The cases are discussed in some detail as the specific factual context of each case is so important to the rights reconciliation process.
The Ontario Human Rights Commission and the Ontario Ministry of Education have finalized a settlement of a human rights complaint initiated by the Commission against the Ministry and the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) in July 2005. A settlement was reached separately with the TDSB in November 2005.
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.
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
