Bole v. JP Morgan Chase & Co., 2013 HRTO 1506

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Adrian Bole Applicant

-and-

JP Morgan Chase & Co. Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Douglas Sanderson Date: September 6, 2013 Citation: 2013 HRTO 1506 Indexed as: Bole v. JP Morgan Chase & Co.

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Adrian Bole, Applicant

No submissions

JP Morgan Chase & Co., Respondent

Sven Poysa, Counsel

1This is an Application filed under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), alleging discrimination with respect to employment because of disability.

2The respondent filed a Response in which it requested Dismissal - without Full Response. The respondent submitted that the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to deal with the Application because it is a Schedule III bank under the Bank Act, S.C. 1991, c. 46, a federal statute, and that banking comes within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government pursuant to section 91(15) of the Constitution Act, 1867 (UK) 30 & 31 Vict., c.3. By letter dated July 31, 2013, the Tribunal directed the applicant to respond to the Request to Dismiss by filing a Response to a Request for an Order by August 14, 2013. The applicant did not file a Response and the time for doing so has passed.

3The Code only applies to matters that come within provincial jurisdiction and does not apply to federally-regulated enterprises or undertakings. The Canadian Human Rights Commission has the power to deal with human rights matters that fall under federal jurisdiction. Pursuant to subsection 91(15) of the Constitution Act, 1867, banking is within federal jurisdiction. The applicant has not contradicted the respondent’s assertion that the matter falls under federal rather than provincial jurisdiction because the respondent engages in the business of banking. Consequently, I find that the Application falls exclusively under federal jurisdiction.

4Accordingly, the Application is dismissed.