Language selector

Goods, services and facilities

 

You have the right to be free from discrimination when you receive goods or services, or use facilities. For example, this right applies to:

  • stores, restaurants and bars
  • hospitals and health services
  • schools, universities and colleges
  • public places, amenities and utilities such as recreation centres, public washrooms, malls and parks
  • services and programs provided by municipal and provincial governments, including social assistance and benefits, and public transit
  • services provided by insurance companies
  • classified advertisement space in a newspaper. 

Relevant policies and guides:

  1. RE: University-Mandated Leave of Absence Policy ­raises human rights concerns

    I am writing today to outline the Ontario Human Rights Commission’s concerns regarding the University of Toronto’s proposed University-Mandated Leave of Absence Policy which is being considered by the University Affairs Board tomorrow (January 30, 2018). The OHRC is concerned that the treatment of students contemplated in the Policy may result in discrimination on the basis of mental health disability contrary to the Human Rights Code.

  2. Submission regarding Bill 89, Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act, 2017

    April 3, 2017 - The Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) welcomes the introduction of Bill 89, Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act, 2017. The Bill responds to human rights concerns raised by the OHRC about various aspects of Ontario’s child welfare system,[1] including the overrepresentation of Indigenous and racialized children and youth in Ontario’s child welfare system.

  3. OHRC Submission to the Independent Street Checks Review

    May 1, 2018 - Regulation 58/16: Collection of Identifying Information in Certain Circumstances – Prohibition and Duties (the “Regulation”) was developed in response to numerous reports of racial profiling in policing across the province, with the goal of “ensuring that police-public interactions should be conducted without bias or discrimination”.  Unfortunately, in our view, the Regulation has not lived up to this promise and, as currently framed, cannot achieve its goal. Racial profiling in policing remains an ongoing reality for Indigenous, Black and other racialized communities.  The Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) is hopeful, however, that through this review and the recommendations that come out of it, the Regulation can be amended so that it can finally meet its promise.

  4. Letter to the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services re: Findings from Tour of Vanier Centre for Women

    January 7, 2019 - As part of the OHRC monitoring of the settlement in the Jahn matter, we visited the Vanier Centre for Women (“Vanier”) in Milton, Ontario. I am writing today to provide you with a summary of what we learned on our December 4, 2018 visit.

  5. Submission of the Ontario Human Rights Commission Concerning barrier-free access requirements in the Ontario Building Code

    March 2002 - This submission is in response to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing’s (MAH) public consultation on the accessibility provisions of the Ontario Building Code (the “Building Code”). It has become increasingly clear to the Commission that the barrier-free requirements in the current Building Code have not been sufficient to achieve the degree of integration and full participation for persons with disabilities that is intended by the Ontario Human Rights Code (the “Human Rights Code”).
  6. Submission of the Ontario Human Rights Commission to the Transportation Standards Review Committee regarding the Initial Proposed Transportation Accessibility Standard

    August 2007 - The Commission has grave concerns with significant aspects of the Transportation Standard. In a number of areas, the standard falls far short of human rights standards, not only failing to make progress towards equality for persons with disabilities, but regressing on gains previously made. The Commission urges the Committee to significantly revise the Transportation Standard in order to bring it into alignment with human rights standards and the purposes of the AODA.

  7. Submission of the Ontario Human Rights Commission to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario regarding the draft policies relating to establishing and ending physician-patient relationships

    February 2008 - The Commission’s concerns focus on the draft policy’s handling of discretionary decisions made by doctors in accepting patients, and in provision of care. As currently stands, the draft policy may in fact lead to confusion and to human rights complaints, in that physicians may see it as condoning practices that the Commission views as discriminatory.
  8. Submission of the Ontario Human Rights Commission to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario Regarding the draft policy, "Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code"

    February 2008 - The draft policy raises a number of new concerns. The following pages detail the Commission’s concerns and provide suggestions for how to address them. We hope that our comments assist the College in providing greater clarity and ensuring that physicians have correct and sufficient information about their obligations under the Code.

Pages