HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Iona Leong

Applicant

-and-

Dufferin and Lawrence Dental Office

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Maureen Doyle

Date: March 28, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 603

Indexed as: Leong v. Dufferin and Lawrence Dental Office

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Iona Leong, Applicant ) Self-represented

1The applicant filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, (the Code) on December 24, 2010, alleging discrimination in the provision of services by the respondent, on the basis of race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, ethnic origin, disability, creed, sex, marital status and reprisal or threat of reprisal and also indicating that the basis is “For the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario to decide”. The allegations relate to billing and quality of service the applicant received from the respondent.

2A Notice of Intent to Dismiss (“NOID”) was issued on February 14, 2011 indicating that the Application appears to be outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction because a review of the narrative setting out the incidents of alleged discrimination fails to identify any specific acts of discrimination within the meaning of the Code allegedly committed by the respondent.

3In response to the NOID, on March 8, 2011, the applicant wrote stating that she was treated differently and unfairly or discriminated against and that the dentist had “imposed disadvantages not imposed on others” because of personal characteristics. She then repeated the allegations contained in her narrative.

4The applicant’s narrative of allegations states that she arrived at the dental office on July 9, 2009 and was obliged to wait for 45 minutes, following which in brief appointment, the dentist told her that she would have to come back the following week for an extraction, as he had another patient to see and would not be able to perform the extraction that day. She complains that she was billed for the brief consultation, but believes that this was wrong, as she alleges she did not receive any service that day. She also alleges that she was of overcharged on other occasions and she complains about the quality of dental care she received.

5The applicant indicates that she has also complained to the Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario.

[6] The Tribunal’s jurisdiction is based on the Code, which prohibits discrimination in the areas of accommodation, services, goods and facilities, employment, contracts and membership in vocational associations, on the basis of grounds listed in the Code. Neither the Application nor the applicant’s submissions suggest a connection between the applicant’s allegations and any of the grounds identified in the Code. The Tribunal does not have a general power to inquire into claims of unfairness or wrongdoing outside those areas or grounds.

7I find that the Application does not raise matters which the Tribunal has the power to decide. Accordingly, I dismiss the Application.