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.
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:
March 10, 2011 - Thank you for your two recent presentations held January 28 and February 25, 2011 to the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC), members of the Mental Health Police Record Checks Coalition (PRCC) and other organizations where you gave an overview of the OACP’s Draft Guideline for Police Record Checks.
March 17, 2011 - Through Canada's Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Canadians are learning a lot about the intergenerational harm Aboriginal peoples and communities experienced because of racism and bigotry. One of the hopes is that we can collectively apply what we have learned so we do not repeat history.
December 17, 2010 - Racial slurs and other name-calling because of one’s personal characteristics such as disability, sex or sexual orientation is wrong. The Ontario Human Rights Code makes that clear. It’s also clear that sports organizations and their governing bodies in Ontario must follow provincial human rights legislation. They should be prohibiting and not sanctioning such conduct.
May 14, 2010 - The Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) supports the regulation of retirement homes across the province. However, we ask the Committee to consider specific recommendations to amend the Bill to enhance the ability of retirement homes providers to meet their obligations under the Ontario Human Rights Code (Code)
The Ontario Human Rights Commission (the OHRC) welcomes the opportunity to provide input into the independent mandatory review of the Accessibility for Ontarian’s with Disabilities Act, 2005 (AODA). The OHRC has a long history of engaging its broad mandate promoting and protecting the rights of persons with disabilities, including providing advice to government dating back to 1998 on the development of successive pieces accessibility legislation as well as more recent submissions on standards being developed under the AODA.
June 4, 2009 - The Ontario Human Rights Commission was concerned to learn this past week about broad police record checks being conducted on some jury pools. While this matter raises important issues around disclosure, impartiality, judicial fairness, privacy, and informed consent, there are also human rights implications for individuals with mental health disabilities under Ontario’s Human Rights Code.
May 1, 2009 - I have watched with great interest – and hope – the events unfolding at Keswick High School in the past week. It was so refreshing to see 400 students rising together to tell their peers, their school, and their community, that racism and bullying are not welcome.
Factum of the proposed intervenor Ontario Human Rights Commission
August 29, 2008 - The Ontario Divisional Court released a decision earlier this month upholding a discrimination ruling of the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario in a case argued by the Commission. The Court’s decision in Lane v. ADGA Group Consultants Inc. of Ottawa warrants all our attention because it reaffirms that employees with mental health disabilities have a right to accommodation of their needs under Ontario’s Human Rights Code.