George Rust D'Eye

The complainant alleged that the Mayor and the City of London discriminated against him on the basis of sexual orientation by refusing to issue a civic proclamation for 'Pride Weekend'.

The Board of Inquiry found that the Mayor's refusal, and the City Council's subsequent failure to rectify the situation, constituted discrimination in the provision of services.

The Board rejected the respondents' arguments that proclamations are not 'services' under the Human Rights Code and that compelling a proclamation would violate their freedom of expression under the Charter.

The Board ordered the respondents to issue the proclamation and awarded the complainant $10,000 in damages.

The complainant alleged that the Mayor of Hamilton discriminated against him based on sexual orientation by refusing to issue a proclamation for Gay and Lesbian Pride Week.

The Board of Inquiry found that a mayoral proclamation is a 'service' under the Human Rights Code, as it is generally perceived as a benefit to the groups seeking it.

The Board held that the Mayor's refusal, though purportedly motivated by a desire to protect the gay and lesbian community from homophobic backlash, was paternalistic and constituted discrimination.

The Board further found that the City of Hamilton was neither directly nor vicariously liable for the Mayor's actions, as issuing proclamations falls outside his statutory duties as Chief Executive Officer.

The Mayor was ordered to pay $5,000 in compensation for injury to dignity and to issue the proclamation if requested in 1995.