Richard Ernest Bridges v. Northumberland County Housing Corporation, 2008 HRTO 112

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Richard Ernest Bridges

Applicant

-and-

Northumberland County Housing Corporation

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Sherry Liang

Date: September 29, 2008

Citation: 2008 HRTO 112

Indexed as: Bridges v. Northumberland County Housing Corporation

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

655 Bay Street, 14^th Floor

Toronto ON M7A 2A3

Phone (416) 326-1312 / 1-866-598-0322 / Fax (416) 326-2199 / Toll Free1-866-355-6099

TTY (416) 314-2379 / 1-800-424-1168

E-mail hrto.registrar@ontario.ca

Website www.hrto.ca

1This is an Application filed on August 14, 2008 under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended (the “Code”).

2On September 17, the applicant made a Request for an Order During Proceedings, which he delivered to the respondent on the same date. In the request, the applicant asks the Tribunal for an order preventing the respondent from taking action with respect to his furniture and possessions until after the hearing of his application. The applicant encloses a letter from the respondent setting out its intention to dispose of his belongings “as per the Residential Tenancies Act.”

3The deadlines for filing responses to the application and to the request have not yet passed. However, the Tribunal has been advised by a representative for the respondent that the respondent will not take any action with respect to the applicant’s belongings until it has filed its response to the Request and received the Tribunal’s decision on it.

4The Tribunal directs the parties’ attention to Rule 23, on interim remedies. Part of that Rule states:

23.1 An Applicant may request that the Tribunal order an interim remedy in an Application. A Request for an Interim Remedy must be made in Form 16 and must be delivered to the other parties along with the completed Application before it is filed with the Tribunal.

23.2 The Tribunal may grant an interim remedy where it is satisfied that:

a) the Application appears to have merit;

b) the balance of harm or convenience favours granting the interim remedy requested; and,

c) it is just and appropriate in the circumstances to do so.

23.3 A Request for an Interim Remedy must include:

a) a detailed description of the order sought;

b) one or more declarations signed by persons with direct first-hand knowledge detailing all of the facts upon which the Applicant relies; and

c) submissions with respect to the merits of the Application, the balance of harm or convenience and why an interim remedy would be just and appropriate in the circumstances, in accordance with the Rule 23.2.

5It appears that the applicant’s request is in substance a request for an interim remedy. Given the information provided by the applicant, the Tribunal waives the requirement at this time to submit the material required by Rule 23.3. However, the Tribunal will request the applicant to make submissions on the application of Rule 23.2, and the Tribunal’s powers to hear this application, as detailed below.

6The material before the Tribunal raises an issue of whether the Tribunal has any jurisdiction over the matters raised in the Application. It appears that several events led the applicant to make this Application, the most pressing being his eviction from rental housing. The applicant also raises allegations that his housing provider assisted his former spouse in denying him access or custody to his son over ten years ago. In the Application, the applicant has checked off “age” as the basis for his belief that he has been discriminated against. He has also given a date of birth showing that he is currently 69 years of age. However, in his explanation of the events, the applicant has made no claim that the respondent discriminated against him on the basis of his age or any other protected ground under the Code. He alleges that the respondent unfairly cancelled his housing subsidy, and also that it took steps to evict him because of his attempts to hold it accountable for its conduct in relation to his son.

7The Tribunal does not have a general power to inquire into evictions or other claims of unfair treatment. Its jurisdiction is based on the Code, which prohibits discrimination in housing on the basis of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, family status, disability or the receipt of public assistance.

8In view of the material before it, the Tribunal requests the applicant’s submissions on the issue of its jurisdiction to hear his Application. The applicant should explain how his Application raises matters which the Tribunal has the power to decide.

9The Tribunal also requests the applicant to provide submissions on the factors listed in Rule 23.2 above and whether, applying these factors, the Tribunal should grant his request for an interim remedy.

10The applicant’s submissions should be delivered to the respondent and filed with the Tribunal by October 17, 2008. The respondent is not required to file a response to the Application, to the request for an interim order, or to the applicant’s submissions at this time.

11Following receipt of the applicant’s submissions, the Tribunal will consider how to proceed with the request and the Application, including whether to invite the respondent to make submissions in response to those of the applicant.

12The applicant may wish to consult the Applicant’s Guide, available on the Tribunal’s website or from the Registrar’s office. Pages 2-3 of the guide set out sources of assistance that may be available to him. I am not seized of this matter.