Mahase v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2015 HRTO 100

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Haniffa Mahase

Applicant

-and-

Toronto Transit Commission

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Naomi Overend

Date: January 23, 2015

Citation: 2015 HRTO 100

Indexed as: Mahase v. Toronto Transit Commission

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Haniffa Mahase, 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 services on the basis of disability. Specifically, the applicant alleges the Toronto Transit Commission was negligent, resulting in injury that aggravated a pre-existing arthritic condition.

2On December 1, 2014, the Tribunal sent the applicant a Notice of Intent to Dismiss that advised the applicant 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 January 14, 2015.

3The applicant filed submissions in response to the Notice on December 11, 2014.

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.

5The Tribunal’s jurisdiction is limited to enforcement of the Code. Therefore, to be within the Tribunal’s jurisdiction an Application must contain allegations that assert that the respondent’s behaviour is discriminatory. The Application and submissions deals with allegations of what the applicant regards as negligence, but on the face of these documents, there is no allegation that that the respondent violated the applicant’s right to equal treatment without discrimination on the basis of disability (or other ground under the Code). That is, the applicant has failed to allege discriminatory conduct on the part of the respondent.

6In these circumstances, I find that it is plain and obvious that the subject matter of the Application does not come within the Code.

7The Application is dismissed.