Lawson v. Ontario (Community and Social Services), 2010 HRTO 361

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Kari Lawson, Kathryn Krome, Colette Cloutier, Tracy Zottarelli, Denis Pilon, Michel Perron, Sharon Hollywood, Darcy Shier, Roger Foster, Walter Clement, Tyrone Lance and Debra Lance

Applicants

-and-

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as Represented by the Minister of Community and Social Services

Respondent

A N D B E T W E E N:

John Graham and Lesley Graham

Applicants

-and-

County of Renfrew – Ontario Works

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: David A. Wright

Date: February 17, 2010

2008-00681-I; 2009-01111-I; 2009-01112-I; 2009-01774-I; 2009-01209-I; 2009-01256-I; 2009-01438-I; 2009-01874-I; 2009-02979-I; 2009-03304-I

Citation: 2010 HRTO 361

Indexed as: Lawson v. Ontario (Community and Social Services)

1This Interim Decision relates to 14 Applications filed with the Tribunal under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O, 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), since June 30, 2008, regarding the special diet allowance under the Ontario Disability Support Program and Ontario Works. The Tribunal has many cases before it raising similar issues, in the form of complaints referred to it by the Ontario Human Rights Commission under the Code as it stood prior to June 30, 2008. In each of these s. 34 cases, the Tribunal determined that it would take no further steps prior to a decision in the “lead cases” among the Commission-referred complaints.

2The Tribunal today released the Decision in the lead cases: Ball v. Ontario (Community and Social Services), 2010 HRTO 360. A copy of the Decision has been forwarded to the parties in these Applications. At para. 175 of that Decision, the Tribunal determined that it would hold a case conference in the remaining Commission-referred complaints on April 13, 2010, at 655 Bay St., Toronto, Ontario, commencing at 10:00 AM. A call-in option will also be available.

3Because of the similar nature of these 14 Applications, the case conference will also address the procedure for them. A formal hearing notice will follow with a call-in number for any parties who wish to attend by telephone.

4At para. 179 of the Ball Decision, the Tribunal directed that, within four months, the remaining complainants and/or Commission shall deliver to the other parties and file with the Tribunal an outline of the basis of the allegations of discrimination in each complaint, including written answers to the following questions:

1. On what disability or disabilities do you base your claim that the special diet allowance discriminates against you?

2. If this disability or these disabilities are not currently on the special diet schedule, what evidence do you have or will you obtain to show that there is general recognition in the Ontario medical community that modifications to a regular healthy diet should be made because of your disability or disabilities?

3. If this disability or these disabilities are not on the special diet schedule, on what basis do you allege, and what evidence will you use to show that the diet leads to extra food costs as compared with a regular healthy diet for a person without the disability or disabilities?

4. If the disability or disabilities are on the schedule and you allege that the funding provided is significantly below the additional costs of the diet, explain the basis of this claim and the evidence you will use to support it.

5The applicants in these 14 cases are directed to also deliver and file such a statement.