Search

Search results

1. 15. Autres limites à l’obligation d’accommodement [256]

   From: Politique sur la prévention de la discrimination fondée sur les troubles mentaux et les dépendances

   Bien que le Code indique que seulement trois facteurs peuvent être pris en compte lorsqu’on détermine si une mesure d’adaptation est susceptible de causer un préjudice injustifié (coût, sources extérieures de financement et exigences en matière de santé et de sécurité), les tribunaux administratifs et judiciaires ont reconnu dans certains cas que le droit à l’accommodement n’est pas absolu, même lorsque ces trois facteurs ne causent aucun préjudice injustifié[257].

2. 15. Other limits on the duty to accommodate [256]

   From: Policy on preventing discrimination based on mental health disabilities and addictions

   While the Code specifies that there are only three factors that will be considered when determining whether the test for undue hardship has been met (cost, outside sources of funding and health and safety issues), in some cases, courts and tribunals have recognized that even where these three factors are not at issue, there is not a limitless right to accommodation.[257] There may be other narrow circumstances where it may not be possible to accommodate a person’s addiction or mental health disability.

3. 17. Preventing and responding to discrimination

   From: Policy on preventing discrimination based on mental health disabilities and addictions

   The ultimate responsibility for maintaining an environment free from discrimination and harassment rests with employers, housing providers, service providers and other responsible parties covered by the Code. It is not acceptable to choose to stay unaware of discrimination or harassment of a person with a mental health disability or addiction, whether or not a human rights claim has been made.

4. 170 plaintes renevoyées par la Commission des droits de la personne au Tribunal l'année passée

   Toronto - La Commission ontarienne des droits de la personne (la « Commission ») a résolu 2 260 dossiers au cours de l'exercice financier se terminant le 31 mars 2006, soit 45 de plus que l'exercice dernier. Par ailleurs, 1 291 causes, soit 57 pour cent, ont été résolues par des réglements négociées, 256 ont été tranchées par une décision de la Commission après examen minutieux des observations écrites des parties, et en plus 170 ont été renvoyées au Tribunal des droits de la personne (le « Tribunal ») pour audience orale.

5. 2. About this policy

   From: Policy on preventing discrimination because of gender identity and gender expression

   This policy is a complete revision and update of the Ontario Human Rights Commission’s (OHRC’s) original Policy on discrimination and harassment because of gender identity first published in 2000.

   In keeping with the Preamble of the Code, this policy aims to:

6. 2. About this policy

   From: Policy on preventing discrimination based on creed

   This policy is a complete revision and update of the OHRC’s original Policy on creed and the accommodation of religious observances first published in 1996. It sets out the OHRC’s position on creed and accommodating observances related to a person's creed.

   The policy offers Ontario citizens and organizations ways to address and prevent discrimination and conflict based on creed in an informed, proactive and principled way. In keeping with the Preamble to the Code, this policy is also designed to:

7. 2. Arguments for not limiting the definition of creed to religion and including secular ethical and moral beliefs

   From: Human rights and creed research and consultation report

   2. 1. Principles of statutory construction and interpretation

   Some of the main arguments for not limiting the OHRC policy definition of creed to religion are derived from principles of statutory construction and interpretation. Among those discussed below include:

8. 2. Background

   From: Minds that matter: Report on the consultation on human rights, mental health and addictions

   The courts have long recognized the historical oppression of people experiencing mental illness or mental health disabilities.[1] In the Supreme Court of Canada case, R. v. Swain, Chief Justice Lamer wrote:

   The mentally ill have historically been the subjects of abuse, neglect and discrimination in our society.  The stigma of mental illness can be very damaging.  The intervener, [Canadian Disability Rights Council], describes the historical treatment of the mentally ill as follows:

9. 2. Code protections for pregnancy and breastfeeding

   From: Policy on preventing discrimination because of pregnancy and breastfeeding

   The Supreme Court of Canada has recognized that pregnancy cannot be separated from sex. It stated, “Discrimination on the basis of pregnancy is a form of sex discrimination because of the basic biological fact that only women have the capacity to become pregnant.”^[8] Section 10(2) of the Code states that, “The right to equal treatment without discrimination because of sex includes the right to equal treatment without discrimination because a woman is or may become pregnant.”

10. 2. Historical trends

    From: Human rights and creed research and consultation report

    2.1 Religion and state relations historically in Canada

Pages