Jack Christie v. Canadian Hockey Association o/a Hockey Canada, 2009 HRTO 1637

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Jack Christie Applicant

-and-

Canadian Hockey Association o/a Hockey Canada Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Kaye Joachim Date: October 8, 2009 Citation: 2009 HRTO 1637 Indexed as: Christie v. Canadian Hockey Association

1This is an Application filed June 25, 2009 under section 53(5) of Part VI of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, (the "Code").

2The purpose of this Interim Decision is to address the constitutional issue raised by the applicant.

3The applicant is a minor who was born February 22, 1993 and was 13 years of age when he filed the complaint with the Ontario Human Rights Commission alleging discrimination in services on the basis of age.

4The respondent is a voluntary association that establishes and maintains uniform regulations and policies for amateur hockey. In 2006 the respondent developed a Canadian Development Model (CDM) that provided uniform eligibility regulations and policies for 14 to 17 year olds relating to playing minor and junior hockey in Canada. There are restrictions on players 14 to 17 with respect to where they can play and with whom.

5The applicant alleges that these rules discriminate against him on the basis of age. Recognizing that the age as defined in the Code "means an age that is 18 years or more" the applicant has asserted that the restriction on age is of no force or effect as contrary to section 15(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

6As the respondent correctly points out, a party who questions the constitutional validity of any law must give notice to the Attorney General of Ontario.

7The Tribunal's Rules of Procedure for Transitional Applications under Sections 53(3) and 53(5) of the Human Rights Code provides:

22.1 Where a party intends to question the constitutional validity or applicability of any law, regulation, by-law or rule or where a party claims a remedy under s. 24(1) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, in relation to an act or omission of the Government of Canada or the Government of Ontario, a Notice of Constitutional Question must be delivered to the Attorneys General of Canada and Ontario and all other parties and filed with the Tribunal as soon as the circumstances requiring the notice become known and, in any event, at least fifteen (15) days before the question is to be argued.

8Accordingly, the applicant is directed to give notice to the Attorney General of Ontario of its intention to question the constitutional validity of the age definition in the Code. In particular, the applicant is directed to file a copy of the Application, the Response, this Interim Decision and all the submissions filed with respect to the preliminary issue to date to the Attorney General and to confirm that he has done so by filing a Statement of Delivery (Form C) with the Tribunal.

9The Attorney General is directed to advise the Tribunal as soon as possible after receiving the Notice of Constitutional Question whether it intends to participate in these proceedings.

10The Tribunal will issue further directions as required.