HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Jessica Heeren Applicant
-and-
CIBC Wood Gundy and Frank Grisdale Respondents
DECISION
Adjudicator: Brian Eyolfson Date: August 27, 2010 Citation: 2010 HRTO 1764 Indexed as: Heeren v. CIBC Wood Gundy
The applicant filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"), on April 21, 2010, alleging discrimination on the basis of record of offences in employment. The purpose of this Decision is to decide whether the Application is within the Tribunal's jurisdiction.
The Tribunal's jurisdiction is based on the Code, which prohibits discrimination in specific areas (for example, accommodation, services, goods and facilities, and employment) on the basis of specific grounds listed in the Code (for example, disability, gender and race, etc.). Record of offences is defined in section 10(1) of the Code as follows:
"record of offences" means a conviction for,
(a) an offence in respect of which a pardon has been granted under the Criminal Records Act (Canada) and has not been revoked, or
(b) an offence in respect of any provincial enactment;
On June 16, 2010, the Tribunal's Registrar issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss ("Notice"). The Notice informed the applicant that the Application appears to be outside of the Tribunal's jurisdiction because it does not describe how the respondents' behaviour was related to discrimination on the basis of a conviction for an offence in respect of which a pardon has been granted under the Criminal Records Act (Canada) and has not been revoked, or an offence in respect of any provincial enactment. In addition, the Application fails to identify any specific acts of discrimination within the meaning of the Code allegedly committed by the respondents. The Tribunal invited the applicant to provide written submissions within 30 days to explain why the Application is within the Tribunal's jurisdiction and further indicated that if she did not file written submissions, the Tribunal would make its decision based only on the information in the Application. To date, no submissions have been received from the applicant.
The Application does not allege any facts which fall within the definition of "record of offences" within the meaning of the Code. In addition, the applicant has not identified any other ground of discrimination or basis upon which she alleges that the Code has been violated.
The Tribunal does not have a general power to inquire into claims of unfairness outside the areas and grounds listed in the Code. In the circumstances, I find that the Application does not raise matters which the Tribunal has the power to decide. Accordingly, the Application is dismissed.
Dated at Toronto, this 27th day of August, 2010.
"Signed By"
__________________________________
Brian Eyolfson
Vice-chair