<!--mc:cls:cover-masthead-->
Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
______________________________________________________________________
**B E T W E E N:**
Lorie Bottos
Applicant
-and-
Council of Carleton University Students’ Association and Brittany Smyth
Respondents
______________________________________________________________________
**interim DECISION**
______________________________________________________________________
**Adjudicator:** Jay Sengupta
**Date:** May 26, 2009
**Citation:** 2009 HRTO 678
**Indexed as:** Bottos v. Council of Carlton Students’ Association
______________________________________________________________________
<!--mc:close:case-cover-->
## Reasons for Decision
[1] This is an Application to the Tribunal filed on December 30, 2008 under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended (the “Code”).
[2] The material before the Tribunal raises an issue of whether the Tribunal has any jurisdiction over the matters raised in the Application.
[3] It appears from Application that a decision made by the respondents to discontinue support for a charitable organization, since rescinded, led the applicant to file this Application.
[4] Section 34(1) of the Code provides that a person who believes that any of his or her rights under Part I of the Code have been infringed may apply to the Tribunal. The Tribunal’s jurisdiction to hear and determine human rights applications is based on the Code, which prohibits discrimination in specific social relationships such as housing, employment and the provision of services, goods or facilities.
[5] Although the Application alleges that the applicant was discriminated against on the basis of race, colour and sex in receipt of goods, services or facilities, it is not clear which goods, services or facility the respondents provide to the applicant. It is therefore not clear how the applicant’s rights were infringed by the actions of the respondents.
[6] In view of the material before it, the Tribunal requests the applicant’s submissions on the issue of how the events described amount to discrimination against him in the provision of goods, services or a facility. The applicant should explain how the respondents’ actions discriminated against him within the meaning of the Code.
[7] The applicant’s submissions should be filed with the Tribunal within 14 days of receiving this Interim Decision.
[8] The applicant may wish to consult the Applicant’s Guide, available on the Tribunal’s website, www.hrto.ca, or from the Registrar’s office. Pages 2-3 of the Guide set out sources of assistance that may be available to him.
<!--mc:open:case-tail-->
Dated at Toronto, this 26<sup>th</sup> day of May, 2009.
“Signed by”
__________________________________
Jay Sengupta
Vice-chair
<!--mc:close:case-tail-->
minicounsel