Who is E.J. Ratushny?

E.J. Ratushny is a ontario board of inquiry at the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario with 3 decisions on record from 1981 to 1981. Key areas include human rights, employment and labour law, landlord and tenant.

What tribunal does E.J. Ratushny sit on?

E.J. Ratushny sits on the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.

What areas of law does E.J. Ratushny decide?

E.J. Ratushny's most common areas include Human Rights (3 decisions), Employment and Labour Law (2 decisions), Landlord and Tenant (1 decisions). E.J. Ratushny has handled 3 decisions across 3 areas.

How many decisions has E.J. Ratushny made?

E.J. Ratushny has 3 decisions on record from 1981 to 1981.

Who frequently appears before E.J. Ratushny?

Representatives who frequently appear before E.J. Ratushny include Hynna, Tom Lederer.

E.J. Ratushny — Ontario Board of Inquiry

ER

E.J. Ratushny

HRTO0 cases1981–1981

HRTONov 6, 1981

Superintendent's expressed intention to eliminate black tenants constituted discrimination; damages denied due to tenant's misconduct.

The complainant alleged that the superintendent of her apartment building discriminated against her and her family on the basis of race and colour, contrary to the Ontario Human Rights Code.

The Board of Inquiry found a history of severe landlord-tenant conflict, including criminal assaults by the complainant's husband.

While rejecting many allegations as unproven or related to the ongoing feud, the Board found that the superintendent discriminated against black children regarding play areas and explicitly expressed an intention to eliminate black tenants.

The Board concluded this constituted discrimination in the terms of occupancy and a denial of occupancy.

Due to the complainant's own misconduct, damages were denied, but the corporate landlord was ordered to implement non-discriminatory rental practices and allow Commission monitoring.

Jeffers v. Greenbrook Manor Ltd., 1981 CanLII 4317

ER

E.J. Ratushny

HRTO0 cases1981–1981

HRTOAug 6, 1981

Sex discrimination complaint dismissed; termination was based on inadequate welding performance, not gender.

The complainant, a female welder, alleged that her dismissal from employment during her probationary period constituted discrimination on the basis of sex contrary to the Ontario Human Rights Code.

The Board of Inquiry found that the complainant was dismissed because she was unable to meet the high standards required for pressure vessel welding, not because of her sex.

The evidence demonstrated that the employer had applied its normal practices and standards, and the complaint was dismissed.

Dismissal based on preference for a Francophone candidate constitutes discrimination on the basis of ancestry.

The complainant, an Anglophone, was dismissed from his position as Administrative Officer after seven years.

His position was eliminated and replaced by a similar one requiring a candidate who was 'fluently bilingual and preferably Francophone'.

The Board of Inquiry found that 'Francophone' in this context meant having French as a mother tongue, which is closely associated with ancestry.

The Board concluded that the preference for a Francophone was a significant factor in the complainant's dismissal, constituting discrimination on the basis of ancestry under the Ontario Human Rights Code.

The respondent was ordered to pay three months' salary and $1,000 for loss of dignity.

Cousens v. Canadian Nurses Assn., 1981 CanLII 4331

for the Canadian Nurses Association

HynnaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ontario Human Rights Commission

Tom LedererCounsel
1 appearance

3

Decisions

1

Years active

1

Tribunals

0.4

cases/mo

HRTO3(100%)

Decision types

trial

3

E.J. Ratushny

Jeffers v. Greenbrook Manor Ltd., 1981 CanLII 4317

E.J. Ratushny

Oue v. TIW Industries Ltd., 1981 CanLII 4302

Tom Lederer

Hynna

E.J. Ratushny

Cousens v. Canadian Nurses Assn., 1981 CanLII 4331

for the Canadian Nurses Association

for the Ontario Human Rights Commission

Decision types