Joan Powell v. Best Buy Canada, 2017 HRTO 956

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Joan Powell

Applicant

-and-

Best Buy Canada

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Brian Cook

Date: July 27, 2017

Citation: 2017 HRTO 956

Indexed as: Powell v. Best Buy Canada

APPEARANCES

Joan Powell, Applicant

Self-represented

Best Buy Canada, Respondent

Nicholas Ellegood, Counsel

1This Application alleges discrimination in retail services because of disability and/or perceived disability, contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (“the Code”). The applicant self-identifies as Black woman with a disability.

2The Tribunal’s review of the Application indicated that it was not clear how the applicant would be able to prove her allegations of discrimination. The Tribunal scheduled a summary hearing to determine if the Application should be dismissed as having no reasonable prospect of success. The summary hearing was held by telephone conference call on July 24, 2017. The applicant and counsel for the respondent participated.

3The Application relates to a customer service issue. The applicant’s caregiver purchased a laptop computer for the applicant from the respondent in about May 2016. The applicant was unable to open a Microsoft software application. She went to the store where the laptop was purchased and was told that the problem was resolved. However, it was not resolved. She returned again to the store and had an interaction with a store Associate and an Assistant Manager. During the interaction, the Assistant Manager told the applicant that she had to leave the store and that he would call the police. The respondent asserts that the Assistant Manager said this because the applicant was creating a disturbance. The applicant agrees that she was “making a ruckus”, but asserts that this happened only after the Assistant Manager said he would call the police.

4At the time of the interaction, the applicant was in a wheelchair, adapting to a recent foot prosthetic. She was accompanied by her caregiver. She alleges that she was treated differently because she is a Black woman who was in wheelchair.

5In a summary hearing, unless there is clear evidence to the contrary, the Tribunal assumes the allegations about what happened to be true. A determination of whether they are in fact true cannot generally be made without hearing evidence about what is alleged to have occurred.

6In this case, there are differing accounts about what happened as between the applicant and the respondent. In my view, this Application cannot be dismissed as having no reasonable prospect of success at this time.

7The Tribunal will accordingly continue to process the Application. The next step is for the respondent to file a Response to the Application (Tribunal Form 2). The respondent is directed to do so within 60 days of this Interim Decision.