Constance B. Backhouse

The complainant, a dairy farmer and member of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, objected to shipping milk on Sundays for religious reasons.

The Ontario Milk Marketing Board (OMMB) accommodated 'no Sunday shippers' by providing alternate pickup days but charged them an extra transportation fee.

The Board of Inquiry found that the complainant's religious beliefs were sincerely held and protected under the Code.

The Board held that the OMMB's policy of assessing special transportation charges to 'no Sunday shippers' constituted constructive discrimination and that absorbing the costs would not cause undue hardship.

The OMMB was ordered to cease charging the extra fees prospectively.

The complainant alleged she was terminated for requesting maternity leave.

She filed both a union grievance and a human rights complaint.

After the grievance was dismissed at arbitration, the respondents raised preliminary objections before the human rights Board of Inquiry, arguing the matter was res judicata and that the five-year delay in appointing the Board violated the Charter and constituted an abuse of process.

The Board dismissed the objections, finding that the arbitration did not finally determine the human rights issue, the parties were different, and the Charter provisions relied upon did not apply to civil human rights proceedings.

The respondents in a sexual harassment complaint brought preliminary motions seeking an adjournment pending judicial review of the Board's appointment, a dismissal of the complaint due to unreasonable delay, and a change of venue.

The Board of Inquiry denied the adjournment, finding it should proceed expeditiously under the Human Rights Code until prohibited by a court order.

The Board also refused to dismiss the complaint for delay, applying the Hyman test that a complaint should not be dismissed without a hearing on the merits unless the delay makes the Board's task impossible.

Finally, the Board denied the request to change the venue to Toronto, finding no overwhelming preponderance of convenience.

The complainant, an occupational therapist with multiple sclerosis, was denied vacation leave and subsequently terminated after she took the leave despite the denial.

The hospital cited her extensive absenteeism due to her disability and pregnancy-related illness as reasons for denying the leave.

The Board of Inquiry found that the complainant's disability was a factor in the decision to deny her vacation leave, which constituted discrimination under the Ontario Human Rights Code.

The Board rejected the application of the labour relations 'work now, grieve later' rule in the human rights context.

The hospital was ordered to pay compensation for lost wages and general damages, and to amend the complainant's personnel file.

The complainant, an eleven-year-old girl with cerebral palsy, used a ramp assist to bowl.

She qualified for a youth bowling tournament but was disqualified because the rules prohibited the use of mechanical devices to deliver the ball.

The Board of Inquiry found that the rule had a disproportionately damaging impact on physically disabled persons and that the ramp assist did not give the complainant an unfair competitive advantage.

The Board concluded that the complainant was denied equal treatment with respect to services because of her handicap.

The respondents were ordered to allow her to participate in competitive tournaments, to develop a rule accommodating young bowlers with hand or arm disabilities, and to pay $2,000 in damages for mental anguish.

The complainant, a Black man, alleged racial discrimination by a nightclub and its disc jockey after being charged double the standard cover charge, denied entry while white patrons were admitted, and subjected to racially motivated harassment.

The Board of Inquiry dismissed preliminary motions regarding the Limitations Act, Charter section 11, and abuse of process due to delay.

On the merits, the Board found that the disc jockey and the corporate owner discriminated against the complainant on the basis of race and colour.

The complainant was awarded $1,500 in general damages, apportioned 75% to the disc jockey and 25% to the corporate owner.