Human rights application alleging reprisal dismissed; campground ban was based on applicant's conduct, not retaliation.
The applicant, a regular occasional camper at the respondent's campground, applied for seasonal camper status to keep a purchased trailer on site.
The respondent denied the application, citing that the applicant was not a 'suitable fit'.
The applicant persistently demanded a more detailed explanation, eventually threatening to file a human rights complaint.
In response to his escalating conduct, the respondent permanently banned him from the campground.
The applicant alleged the ban was a reprisal for his threat to go to the Tribunal.
The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding the respondent's decision to ban the applicant was based on his aggressive and persistent conduct, not an intention to retaliate for his threat to claim Code rights.
John Clarence Harvey v. Killam Properties Inc., 2012 HRTO 568
