2012/13, 21% of applications were filed based on the social area of goods, services and
facilities.^49 This was second only to the social area of employment, which represented
77% of applications.
The Code does not define the word “services”. The Tribunal and the Divisional Court
have found that services must mean something which is of benefit that is provided by
one person to another or to the public.^50 In Cooper the Tribunal held that services
“suggest(s) the necessity for some sort of service relationship, as opposed to a mere
interaction, between the parties.”^51
The word “services” has been interpreted broadly, and includes, for example, retail
services^52 , hotel services, restaurant services^53 , medical services^54 , police services^55 ,
public transportation services^56 , coroner’s inquests^57 , participation in volunteer
organizations, organized sports, leisure leagues^58 , social clubs,^59 voting^60 , and driver’s
licensing processes^61.
Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, online: HRTO Statistics
http://www.hrto.ca/hrto/index.php?q=en/node/128. 49
Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, online: Fiscal Year 2012- 2013 – New Applications
http://www.hrto.ca/hrto/index.php?q=en/node/197. 50
Braithwaite v. Ontario (Attorney General), 2005 HRTO 31 (CanLII), rev’d on other grounds Ontario
(Attorney General) v. Ontario Human Rights Commission, 2007 CanLII 56481 (ON SCDC). The
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal took a similar view in Dreaver v. Pankiw, 2009 CHRT 8 (CanLII) at para
23; application for Judicial Review dismissed: Canada (Canadian Human Rights Commission) v. Pankiw,
2010 FC 555 (CanLII). The Federal Court of Appeal has also taken a similar approach in Watkin v.
Attorney General of Canada 51 , 2008 FCA 170 (CanLII) at para. 31.
52 Cooper v. Pinkofskys, 2008 HRTO 390 (CanLII) at paras. 9-10.^
53 See, for example: Wozenilek v. 7-Eleven Canada, 2010 HRTO 407 (CanLII).^
54 See, for example: Schussler v. 1709043 Ontario, 2009 HRTO 2194 (CanLII).
55 See, for example: Sinopoli v. Walling, 2009 HRTO 50 (CanLII).^
56 See, for example: McKay v. Toronto Police Services Board, 2011 HRTO 499 (CanLII) at para. 120.^
57 See, for example: Lepofsky v. TTC, 2007 HRTO 23 (CanLII).^
Braithwaite,supra note 50; see also: Marsden v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services),
2011 HRTO 30 (CanLII). 58
59 See, for example: Co.K. v. Ontario Hockey Federation, 2012 HRTO 76 (CanLII).^
60 See, for example: Huang v. 1233065 Ontario, 2011 HRTO 825 (CanLII).^
Hughes v. Election Canada, 2010 CHRT 4 (CanLII) at paras. 53-54. Hughes was a decision of the
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal applying the federal human rights legislation to voting within a federal
context. On the issue of whether voting is a service pursuant to statutory human rights legislation, similar
reasoning would almost certainly be applied by the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario. 61
Mortillaro v. Ontario (Transportation), 2011 HRTO 310 (CanLII).