Raymond Kuate Konga v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank, 2016 HRTO 99

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Raymond Kuate Konga

Applicant

-and-

The Toronto-Dominion Bank

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Jo-Anne Pickel

Date: January 21, 2016

Citation: 2016 HRTO 99

Indexed as: Kuate Konga v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Raymond Kuate Konga, Applicant

Self-represented

The Toronto-Dominion Bank, Respondent

Jocelyn Duquette, Counsel

1This Decision addresses whether the Tribunal should defer making a decision on whether this Application falls under provincial or federal jurisdiction pending a determination of the issue by the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

2The applicant filed an Application alleging discrimination in services by an employee of The Toronto-Dominion Bank (“TD Bank”). He named the employee personally in his Application. It appears that the applicant filed a separate complaint against the TD Bank with the Canadian Human Rights Commission (“CHRC”).

3The TD Bank filed a Response on behalf of its employee. In its Response, the TD Bank stated that at all times the employee was making representations on behalf of the bank and not in her personal capacity. On this basis, TD Bank submitted that this Application should be dismissed as it falls under federal jurisdiction.

4In his Reply, the applicant agreed with the respondent that the claim against the employee and the claim against TD Bank should be combined into one claim before the CHRC in light of TD Bank’s assertion that she was acting as a representative of the bank at the relevant times. Nevertheless, the applicant requested that the Tribunal defer his Application pending a determination by the CHRC that it has jurisdiction over the claim against the employee as well as the bank.

ANALYSIS

5In the circumstances of this case, I do not find it appropriate to defer consideration of this Application pending a determination by the CHRC because I find that the subject matter of the Application clearly falls under federal jurisdiction.

6The Code only applies to matters that fall within provincial jurisdiction and does not apply to federally-regulated businesses. Pursuant to subsection 91(15) of the Constitution Act, 1867, (U.K.), 30 & 31 Victoria, c. 3, banking, incorporation of banks and the issue of paper money are within federal jurisdiction. The CHRC has power to deal with human rights matters that fall under federal jurisdiction.

7The subject matter of the Application relates to the provision of banking services, as it is clear from the Application and the Response that the employee was providing banking services to the applicant. The employee worked for TD Bank and the respondent conceded that she was acting as a representative of the bank at the relevant time. Therefore, this Application falls under federal jurisdiction over banking.

Order

8The Application is dismissed as it falls under federal jurisdiction.