Gurrieri v. Ontario (Attorney General), 2011 HRTO 1597

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Paul Gurrieri

Applicant

• and-

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Attorney General

Respondent

decision

Adjudicator: Ian R. Mackenzie

Date: August 25, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 1597

Indexed as: Gurrieri v. Ontario (Attorney General)

1Paul Gurrieri has filed an Application under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended (the “Code”), alleging discrimination in services on the basis of disability. He alleges that he was discriminated against in a hearing before an Assessment Officer.

2On July 19, 2011, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (NOID) because the Application appeared to be challenging the decision or outcome of an adjudicative process. The NOID also noted that it appeared that Assessment Officers are judicial officers of the Superior Court of Justice with the authority to review lawyers’ bills under the Solicitors Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.15 and adjudicate costs awarded to parties by judges or masters. The NOID referred the applicant to the following decisions where the Tribunal has held that “services” within the meaning of the Code does not include decisions or outcomes of adjudications by statutory tribunals or the Courts: Baird v. Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal, 2009 HRTO 99 (“Baird”); Christianson v. Ontario (IPC), 2009 HRTO 203, reconsideration refused 2009 HRTO 424; Zaki v. Ontario (Community and Social Services), 2009 HRTO 1595.

3In his submissions, the applicant stated that the Assessment Officer treated him with “incivility” in the hearing and failed to acknowledge his disability. He also alleged that the Assessment Officer “mocked him” and did not “properly assess the bill procedure protocol”.

4For the reasons which follow I dismiss the Application.

5Allegations in an Application that fall within the adjudicative function of a tribunal or court have been held by the Tribunal to not meet the definition of “services” under the Code: for example, see Baird.

6Assessment Officers are appointed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council, on the recommendation of the Attorney General, under the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. 43. Assessment Officers are officers of the court. Comments made during the course of a judicial proceeding such as an assessment of costs are within the adjudicative function of the courts and are therefore not “services” within the meaning of the Code: Christianson v. Attorney General (Ontario), 2009 HRTO 840, reconsideration refused , 2009 HRTO 1250.

7Accordingly, the Application is dismissed.