Cameron v. Maison d’Amitié, 2009 HRTO 824

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Robert Cameron

Applicant

-and-

Maison d’Amitié and Anne Hodge

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: David A. Wright

Date: June 10, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 824

Indexed as: Cameron v. Maison d’Amitié

INTRODUCTION

1Maison d’Amitié is a francophone shelter for women. It offers services to women to address violence against women and children. The respondent Anne Hodge is the executive director of Maison d’Amitié. It appears that the mother of the applicant’s child was admitted as a resident for a period of time in 2008.

2In this Application, filed under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), the applicant alleged that the respondents violated his right to equal treatment without discrimination because of sex and disability. He alleges that the respondents helped the mother of his child “abduct” his son, that they perjured themselves in court, that the mother of his child threatened him with “I want to take advantage of the system and the people here (shelter) and with their help you will never see your son again”, that a representative of the Maison d’Amitié said, “we’ll kill you in court” and that the Ottawa police refused to tell him where his son was living.

3The Tribunal does not have a general power to determine allegations of wrongdoing. Its jurisdiction is limited to determining whether there was discrimination based upon one of the grounds set out in the Code. In the area of services, s. 1 of the Code reads as follows:

Every person has a right to equal treatment with respect to services, goods and facilities, without discrimination because of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, family status or disability.

4In my opinion, there is a question of whether the Tribunal has the jurisdiction (power) to consider the applicant’s allegations. It is not clear that the applicant’s allegations can constitute discrimination with respect to services, as defined in the Code. In particular, it is not clear that a women’s shelter that offers accommodation to a mother and her child provides services, as defined in the Code, to the child’s father.

5The applicant must deliver to the respondents’ counsel and file with the Tribunal, by June 25, 2009, submissions that explain how, in his view, his Application raises allegations of discrimination with respect to services as defined in the Code. After considering his submissions, the Tribunal may determine that the Application should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

6The Tribunal directs the applicant’s attention to the Applicant’s Guide, found on the Tribunal’s web site and available from the Registrar’s office. A list of resources available to applicants is found at pages 2 and 3 of the guide.

7I am not seized of this Application.