The applicant sought judicial review of a Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario decision dismissing her application for delay.
The applicant's late husband was denied a liver transplant due to a policy requiring six months of abstinence from alcohol.
The applicant filed her human rights complaint almost two years later, arguing she did not know the policy was discriminatory until then.
The Divisional Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, finding it reasonable to conclude that ignorance of the law does not constitute a good faith explanation for delay under section 34(2) of the Human Rights Code.
