HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Her Majesty the Queen (also known as Peter Lofters)
Applicant
-and-
The Good Shepherd Non-Profit Homes and K. D’Abreu
Respondents
DECISION
Adjudicator: Douglas Sanderson
Indexed as: the Queen (a.k.a Lofters) v. The Good Shepherd Non-Profit Homes
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Her Majesty the Queen, Applicant
Self-represented
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 occupancy of accommodation because of creed.
2The applicant, who changed his name to Her Majesty the Queen, alleges that the individual respondent came to the door of the applicant’s apartment at noon on Victoria Day to ask the applicant to turn down the volume on his television.
3On June 25, 2014, the Tribunal sent the applicant a Notice of Intent to Dismiss that advised him that a review of the Application and 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. The Tribunal directed the applicant to file written submissions in response to the Notice by July 25, 2014.
4The applicant filed submissions in response to the Notice on July 8, 2014. The applicant submitted that he was refused service and the respondent refuses to serve him like her other clients.
Analysis and Decision
4An application will only be dismissed at a preliminary stage if it is “plain and obvious” on the face of the application that it does not fall within the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. See Masood v. Bruce Power, 2008 HRTO 381. The applicant provided no basis for his allegation that the respondents’ actions were in any way connected to his creed. In my view, it is plain and obvious that that the subject matter of the Application does not come within the Code.
5The Application is dismissed.
Dated at Toronto, this 16th day of September, 2014.
“Signed by”
Douglas Sanderson
Vice-chair