Professor Frances Henry

The complainant, a Black man, alleged that he was discriminated against on the basis of race and colour by the respondent municipality when he attended City Hall to pick up a response to a freedom of information request.

During a dispute over the contents of the information package, a City employee called security, and a security guard subsequently escorted the complainant from the premises.

The Tribunal found that the complainant was loud, aggressive, and banged his fist on the counter during the interaction.

The Tribunal concluded that the decision to call security was based entirely on the complainant's behaviour and that race was not a factor.

The complaint was dismissed.

The appellant sought judicial review of the Human Rights Commission's refusal to refer her discrimination complaint to a board of inquiry and sought broad pre-hearing examination and production under r. 39.03.

The Court of Appeal split on whether further disclosure could be compelled from the Commission, with the majority holding that deliberative secrecy and the absence of general discovery on judicial review do not bar a focused examination where there is an objectively reasonable concern that undisclosed facts, arguments, considerations, or strategic factors may have informed the decision.

The court held that the appellant was entitled to examine a senior Commission official on what additional material was before the commissioners, whether strategic concerns influenced the decision, and whether unrevealed reasons existed.

The appeal from the order striking portions of the appellant's affidavit was dismissed, but the appeal concerning the scope of examination was allowed and costs were awarded to the appellant.