Hamdi Mursal

The applicant filed a human rights complaint against Legal Aid Ontario and two personal respondents, alleging discriminatory treatment in an investigation and historical differential treatment dating back to 1993.

The Tribunal dismissed the historical allegations under section 34(1) of the Human Rights Code, finding they were out of time, did not constitute a series of incidents, and the delay was not incurred in good faith.

The Tribunal declined to remove the personal respondents from the proceedings, as their conduct was central to the allegations of racism and racial profiling.

The applicant, a legal aid clinic, filed a human rights complaint alleging that Legal Aid Ontario (LAO) discriminated against it on the basis of race in the manner it conducted an investigation into alleged financial irregularities.

The respondents sought to dismiss the application at the outset, arguing that the substance had been dealt with in a prior judicial review application and that LAO's oversight functions are not 'services' under the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal found that the prior proceedings did not appropriately deal with the substance of the complaint and that LAO's oversight and investigation of clinics do constitute a service within the meaning of the Code.

The Tribunal directed the applicant to provide further particulars regarding historical allegations and the personal respondents.