HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Kenneth Gaetano
Applicant
-and-
HSBC Bank of Canada and Carol Kennedy
Respondents
DECISION
Adjudicator: Ena Chadha
Indexed as: Gaetano v. HSBC Bank of Canada
1The applicant filed an Application under section 34 of the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"), alleging that he experienced disability discrimination and reprisal with respect to employment on the grounds of sex (gender), sexual orientation, and age.
BACKGROUND
2The applicant first sent his Application to the Tribunal on June 24, 2010.
3On June 29, 2010, the Tribunal wrote a Confirmation of Receipt letter to the applicant. This letter advised the applicant that his documentation would be assigned and reviewed for completeness and, if incomplete, it would be returned to him with an explanation as to why it was determined to be an incomplete application. This letter further indicated that the Application had not yet been accepted for processing and, as such, had not been sent to any respondents or affected parties.
4On August 12, 2010, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Incomplete Application to the applicant indicating that his original Application was incomplete in several areas and the requisite supplementary Form 1-A was missing. The Notice of Incomplete Application notes that, because the Application was incomplete, it could not processed at that time.
5The applicant returned his completed application forms to the Tribunal on August 24, 2010.
6On December 20, 2010, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss to the applicant. The Notice advised that the Application appeared to be outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction. The Tribunal invited the applicant to provide written submissions addressing the issue of jurisdiction.
7On January 5, 2010, the applicant responded to the Notice confirming that the respondent is a federally regulated bank and asking why the Tribunal "allowed the process to take the course that it did, and not identify the outcome earlier".
8As the applicant has concerns with respect to the fact that the Tribunal did not identify the jurisdictional issue at some earlier stage, it may be useful to provide some clarity about the Tribunal's process.
9The Application as initially filed identified only an individual respondent. The organizational respondent was not identified until after the applicant responded to the Notice of Incomplete Application. The completed Application also provided documents related to the applicant's complaint filed with the Canadian Human Rights Commission concerning the events raised in the present Application.
10At this point the new materials were reviewed for completeness and, once accepted as complete, the Application was reviewed for jurisdictional and preliminary issues and the Notice of Intent to Dismiss was issued.
11It is noteworthy that the cover page to the Application, titled "How to Apply to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario", specifically directs potential applicants to refer to the Applicant's Guide before completing the Tribunal's forms. The Applicant's Guide explains that the Tribunal does not have the power to decide applications against federally regulated organizations and identifies chartered banks as an example of a federally regulated organization. The Application cover page also clearly notes that, if the complaint is against a federally regulated business or service, the applicant should contact the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
12While I appreciate the applicant would have preferred to know sooner that his Application appeared to be outside of the Tribunal's jurisdiction, the Tribunal is committed to a fair, open, and accessible process which requires that it undertake appropriate practices and procedures in handling Applications, including completeness reviews prior to processing.
DECISION
Jurisdiction
13I find the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to proceed with this Application. The Code only applies to matters that fall within provincial jurisdiction and does not apply to federally regulated businesses. Pursuant to subsection 91(15) of the Constitution Act, 1867, (U.K.), 30 & 31 Victoria, c. 3, banking, incorporation of banks and the issue of paper money are within federal jurisdiction.
14Based on the information provided by the applicant, the Application pertains to the applicant's employment with a federally regulated bank and therefore falls exclusively under federal jurisdiction, and in particular, within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Canadian Human Rights Commission. It appears the applicant has already commenced a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
15The Application is dismissed as outside of the Tribunal's jurisdiction.
Dated at Toronto, this 21st day of January, 2011
"Signed by"
Ena Chadha
Vice-chair