Clement v. Trenton OPP, 2013 HRTO 8

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Paul Clement

Applicant

-and-

Trenton OPP

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Naomi Overend Date: January 3, 2013 Citation: 2013 HRTO 8 Indexed as: Clement v. Trenton OPP

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Paul Clement, Applicant

Self-represented

1This Application alleges discrimination with respect to services because of reprisal contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"). On November 13, 2012, the Tribunal sent a Notice of Intent to Dismiss to the applicant because the allegations in the Application appeared to not constitute reprisal as that term is defined in the Code. The applicant filed further written submissions in response.

2Section 8 of the Code states:

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.

3In order to fall within section 8, an application must allege that the respondent's actions took place in response to the applicant engaging in any of the following activities:

• claiming or enforcing a right under the Code;
• instituting or participating in proceedings under the Code:, or
• refusing to infringe the right of another person.

4The Application fails to allege reprisal in response to any of the above criteria. While the applicant submits that his rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms have been breached, the Tribunal only has jurisdiction over rights set out in the Code. Accordingly, the Application is dismissed on the basis that it is outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction.