HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Michael Harvey
Applicant
-and-
Mutual Fund Dealers Association of Canada and Investia Financial Services Inc.
Respondents
DECISION
Adjudicator: Ken Bhattacharjee
Indexed as: Harvey v. Mutual Fund Dealers Association of Canada
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Michael Harvey, Applicant ) Self-represented
1The purpose of this Decision is to decide whether the Tribunal should dismiss the Application on a preliminary basis because it is outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.
2On October 26, 2012, the applicant, who identifies as a licensed mutual fund representative, filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), which alleged that the respondents subjected him to reprisals with respect to his membership in a vocational association
3Specifically, the applicant alleged that Investia Financial Services Inc. terminated his contract without notice and reason, and that the Mutual Fund Dealers Association of Canada was intent on proceeding with disciplinary action against him despite failing to discover any wrongdoing during their two-year investigation.
4On November 13, 2012, the Tribunal’s Registrar issued the applicant a Notice of Intent to Dismiss, which informed him that the Application appears to be outside of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction because the Application and the narrative setting out the incidents fail to identify how the respondents subjected him to reprisals within the meaning of the Code. The Tribunal directed the applicant to provide written submissions addressing this issue.
5On December 13, 2012, the applicant filed submissions which stated that his situation involves competing rights and systemic discrimination as set out in the Ontario Human Rights Commission’s Policy on Competing Human Rights.
6Rule 13.1 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure provides that the Tribunal may dismiss an application that is outside the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. Rule 13.2 further states that where it appears to the Tribunal that an application is outside its jurisdiction, it shall, prior to sending the application to the respondent, issue a Notice of Intent to Dismiss the Application. The Notice is only sent to the applicant, and requires him or her to file written submissions. Under the Tribunal’s jurisprudence, an application will only be dismissed at this preliminary stage if it is “plain and obvious” on the face of the application that it does not fall within its jurisdiction. See Masood v. Bruce Power, 2008 HRTO 381; Morin v. Alliance de la fonction publique du Canada, 2008 HRTO 58; and Hotte v. Ontario (Finance), 2008 HRTO 63.
7Section 8 of the Code provides:
Every person has a right to claim and enforce his or her rights under this Act, to institute and participate in proceedings under this Act and to refuse to infringe a right of another person under this Act, without reprisal or threat of reprisal for so doing.
8The applicant did not explain how the respondents retaliated against him for claiming or enforcing his rights under the Code, or instituting and participating in proceedings under the Code. As such, it is plain and obvious that the Application is outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.
9The Application is dismissed.
Dated at Toronto, this 6^th^ day of February, 2013.
“Signed by”
Ken Bhattacharjee
Vice-chair