Scope of Jurisdiction (Human Rights Tribunal)

Caselaw.Ninja, Riverview Group Publishing 2021 ©
Date Retrieved:	2024-12-22
CLNP Page ID:	2445
Page Categories:	[Human Rights],
Citation:	Scope of Jurisdiction (Human Rights Tribunal), CLNP 2445, <https://rvt.link/ei>, retrieved on 2024-12-22
Editor:	Sharvey
Last Updated:	2024/12/04

Need Legal Help?
Call (888) 655-1076

Forde v. Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario, 2011 HRTO 1389 (CanLII)

[17] The Tribunal does not have the power to deal with general allegations of unfairness. For an Application to continue in the Tribunal’s process, there must be a basis beyond mere speculation and accusations to believe that an applicant could show discrimination on the basis of one of the grounds alleged in the Code or the intention by a respondent to commit a reprisal for asserting one’s Code rights.

[18] The applicant has referred to the concept of prima facie discrimination. In my view, this concept is not helpful in interpreting the Tribunal’s summary hearing rule. In human rights law, prima facie discrimination has been used to mean various things. In some contexts – for example Ontario Human Rights Comm. v. Simpsons-Sears, 1985 CanLII 18 (SCC), [1985] 2 S.C.R. 536 and Jagait v. IN TECH Risk Management, 2009 HRTO 779 -- the term is used to refer to what claimant must show to avoid having a claim dismissed without requiring a respondent to call evidence. In others – for example Arias v. Centre for Spanish Speaking Peoples, 2009 HRTO 1024 -- it refers to whether, assuming the allegations to be true, there is discrimination. In yet others – for example Ontario (Disability Support Program) v. Tranchemontagne, 2010 ONCA 593 (C.A.) – it refers to what is required for a claimant to demonstrate discrimination within the meaning of the Code. In my view, it is much more helpful and understandable to parties to simply speak in the summary hearing context about whether there is a reasonable prospect the application will succeed as set out in Dabic. Accordingly, whether there is a reasonable prospect the applicant can prove a violation of the Code is the issue that was explained in the Case Assessment Direction and on the telephone during the summary hearing.