Selinger v. Icon Property Management Ltd., 2013 HRTO 1325

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Christine Selinger

Applicant

-and-

Icon Property Management Ltd. and Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1955

Respondents

-and-

Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1949

Intervenor

Interim Decision

Adjudicator: Ena Chadha

Date: July 30, 2013

Citation: 2013 HRTO 1325

Indexed as: Selinger v. Icon Property Management Ltd.

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Icon Property Management Ltd. and Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation 1955, Respondents

Deborah Howden, Counsel

Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation 1949, Intervenor

Deborah Howden, Counsel

1This Application was filed on August 13, 2012, under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended ("the Code"), alleging discrimination with respect to housing because of disability.

2The applicant alleges that the respondents have failed to accommodate her needs with respect to accessible parking.

3The respondents filed Responses on October 16, 2012, denying the allegations and asserting that they properly attempted to accommodate the applicant. The Response notes that the respondent condominium's accessible parking is shared with the adjacent property, Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1949.

4On April 18, 2013, the applicant filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings requesting that the Tribunal provide notice to Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1949 as an affected party and that she be permitted to amend her Application to add the non-monetary and public interest remedial claims.

5By way of Interim Decision 2013 HRTO 932, the Tribunal ordered notice of this proceeding be provided to Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1949 and directed that Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1949 could file a request to intervene. The Tribunal also allowed the applicant's request to amend her remedial claims. The Tribunal ordered that the respondents could file an amended Response to address the applicant's amendments.

6On June 26, 2013, Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1949 filed a request to intervene. No party filed any submissions in response to this request.

7On June 28, 2013, the respondents filed documentation setting out their proposed amendments to address the applicant's amendments.

8In accordance with Rule 11 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure, the Tribunal may allow a person or organization to intervene in any case at any time on such terms as the Tribunal may determine.

9The parties agree that the parking area in dispute is shared with Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1949. It does not appear to be contested that Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1949 has an interest in the issues and may be impacted by the outcome. The applicant has indicated an intention to seek a remedy that involves Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1949's parking area.

10As such, the Tribunal grants intervenor status Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1949.

11The Tribunal orders as follows:

i. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1949 is granted intervenor status. The adjudicator overseeing the hearing on the merits will determine the scope of the intervention; and

ii. The Response is amended to include the respondents' response as set out in their June 28, 2013 documentation.

12I am not seized of this matter.