3 total
Liquor licence for relocated university campus bar approved with conditions despite neighborhood objections regarding student drunkenness.
The applicant sought to relocate its campus bar, the Phoenix Bar & Grill, to a new central location at McMaster University.
Neighborhood residents objected to the liquor licence application, citing ongoing issues with intoxicated students, noise, and vandalism in the area.
The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that while the residents' concerns about general student drunkenness were valid, there was no evidence linking these issues specifically to the applicant's operations, which had a 43-year history without infractions.
The Tribunal approved the licence application but attached conditions regarding patio music, surveillance, and community contact to address the residents' concerns.
Denial of disability benefits based solely on substance dependence violates the Human Rights Code.
The respondents, who suffered from severe alcoholism, were denied disability benefits under the Ontario Disability Support Program Act (ODSPA) because s. 5(2) disqualifies individuals whose sole impairment is substance dependence.
The Social Benefits Tribunal found this provision discriminated against the respondents based on disability, contrary to s. 1 of the Human Rights Code.
The Divisional Court upheld this decision but proposed a new test for discrimination.
On appeal, the Court of Appeal rejected the Divisional Court's new test, finding it improperly removed the requirement to prove disadvantage and reversed the burden of proof.
However, the Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal's finding that s. 5(2) of the ODSPA was discriminatory and rejecting the appellant's expert evidence that the policy was medically appropriate.
Denial of disability benefits to individuals whose sole impairment is addiction violates the Human Rights Code.
The Director of the Ontario Disability Support Program appealed a Social Benefits Tribunal decision finding that s. 5(2) of the ODSPA, which denies benefits to individuals whose sole impairment is addiction, violated the Human Rights Code.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal's finding that the respondents, who were disabled by alcoholism, were discriminated against.
The Court confirmed that the Tribunal was not required to apply the third, dignity-focused step of the Law test to establish discrimination under the Code.