CITATION: Miller v. HRTO, 2025 ONSC 3002
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 011/25
DATE: 20250522
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT
Justices Backhouse, Matheson, and Shore JJ.
BETWEEN:
CHRISTIAN JESUS JONATHAN JACOB MILLER
Applicant
– and –
HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO, HIS MAJESTY THE KING IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO, AS REPRESENTED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO
Respondents
Christian Jesus Jonathan Jacob Miller, Self-Represented Applicant
Matthew Chung, Counsel for His Majesty the King in Right of Ontario (Attorney General of Ontario)
Maija-lisa Robinson, Counsel for the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
HEARD at Toronto: May 20, 2025
ORALLY:
[1] The Applicant seeks an order compelling the Human Rights Commission of Ontario (HRTO) to make a decision about his application alleging discrimination under the Human Rights Code.
[2] The Applicant submitted his complaint to the HRTO in March 2021, about fifteen years after the events giving rise to his complaint. Although various steps were taken after that date, no decision had been rendered by January 2025. This application was then commenced.
[3] The HRTO released its decision in March of 2025, dismissing the complaint on account of the lengthy delay after the Code’s one year limitation period. The Applicant submits that this Court should exercise its discretion to hear this application, despite mootness, because he has suffered irreparable harm due to the delay. The HRTO submits that the Applicant has conflated the harm he asserts from the alleged discrimination with the mootness issue.
[4] We are not persuaded to exercise our discretion to hear this moot application, having regard for the principles in Borowski v. Canada, 1989 123 (SCC), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 342, at pp. 353-360. Upon reading the record and hearing the Applicant’s submissions, it is apparent that this matter, its history, and the ultimate HRTO decision, is focused on the particular circumstances of his complaint, not the sort of broader issues of public importance that would provide a starting point for our exercise of discretion under Borowski.
[5] This application is therefore dismissed. There is no order as to costs.
Backhouse J.
Matheson J.
Shore J.
Date: May 22, 2025
CITATION: Miller v. HRTO, 2025 ONSC 3002
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 011/25
DATE: 20250521
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT
Justices Backhouse, Matheson, and Shore JJ.
BETWEEN:
CHRISTIAN JESUS JONATHAN JACOB MILLER
Applicant
– and –
HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO, HIS MAJESTY THE KING IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO, AS REPRESENTED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO
Respondents
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Date of Reasons for Judgment: May 22, 2025
Date of Release: May 22, 2025