Law Times

PAGE 14 vexatious litigant by HRTO Law grad labelled BY MICHAEL McKIERNAN Law Times T for including her failed first year on her official transcript. Anica Visic had attempted to add the university as a respondent he Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario has declared a law school graduate a vexatious litigant aſter her fourth failed attempt to take action against the University of Windsor to an application alleging human rights violations by the Law So- ciety of Upper Canada. The matter stemmed from the regulator' decision to extend her articling requirement and institute a good character review before she could be called to the bar. But in a recent decision, HRTO vice chairwoman Ena s Chadha refused to add the university, dismissed the applica- tion against the LSUC, and granted the university' label Visic a vexatious litigant with respect to the issue of her official transcript. Visic failed two courses in her first year at Windsor in 2000 s request to and was told her studies would be discontinued, according to Chadha' on medical grounds in 2002 and went on to graduate in 2005. In 2005, when she discovered the university was including s decision. Visic was granted readmission to first year her failed grades on her official transcript, Visic launched a hu- man rights complaint against the school and three professors. The matter was ultimately dismissed as out of time. LT FOCUS September 10, 2012 • Law timeS Zoning challenge moves ahead But Toronto blamed for slowing down process BY KENNETH JACKSON For Law Times follow is just taking form, but a similar case involving municipal zoning bylaws shows the matter can drag for on a long time if the mu- nicipality decides to fight it tooth and nail. That' T what's known as the Dream s the situation for Team, a group of individuals living with disabilities and advocates challenging the zoning bylaws of four differ- ent Ontario municipalities: Smith Falls, Kitchener, Sar- nia, and Toronto. The group claims the rights complaint (see page 13) will Henley's human he path Kendra arguments that the On- tario Municipal Board would be in a better posi- tion to hear the complaint. It also rejected a claim that the application was vague and lacking in particulars. In addition, the tribunal ruled it was premature to determine the city' challenges without "a prop- er evidentiary foundation and full legal argument." The city then filed for s various judicial review of the tri- bunal' 'It's not over yet but it's moving in the direction of remov- ing the restrictions we were challenging,' says Kathy Laird. bylaws limit the number of people with disabilities who may live in a given place. For instance, a Toronto bylaw states that group homes must be at least 250 metres from each oth- er. The Dream Team says this is discriminatory and a violation of people' Human Rights Legal Support Centre has taken on the com- plaint. The Dream Team filed its As with the Henley case, the s human rights. complaint more than two years ago. ADVISE YOUR CLIENTS ON HOW TO COMPLY WITH AODA STANDARDS A LEGAL GUIDE TO THE ACCESSIBILITY FOR ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, 2005 SUNIL KAPUR AND KATE McNEILL-KELLER This title offers comprehensive insight into the Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 and because it is updated regularly via looseleaf inserts, you'll never have to buy another resource on the topic. It features expert commentary and addresses the legal requirements under each Accessibility Standard, as well as the timelines for complying. A Concise Road-Map to AODA • Overview of accessibility issues in Ontario • The Standards development process • Standards: Customer Service; Accessible Built Environment; Information and Communication; Transportation and Employment • Integrated Accessibility Standards Regulation — General • Administration of the Act • Compliance • Lessons from other jurisdictions ORDER # 984951-65203 $125 1 volume looseleaf supplemented book Anticipated upkeep cost – $110 per supplement 2-3 supplements per year Supplements invoiced separately 978-0-7798-4951-2 AVAILABLE RISK-FREE FOR 30 DAYS Call Toll-Free: 1-800-387-5164 In Toronto: 416-609-3800 Order online at www.carswell.com Shipping and handling are extra. Price subject to change without notice and subject to applicable taxes. CANADA LAW BOOK® that place limits on supportive housing oſten shut out people with disabilities. The complaint marked the It argues zoning bylaws first time someone has launched a legal challenge against these types of bylaws using Ontario' human rights system, according to the legal support centre. Since the complaint began, at s least one municipality, Toronto, has sought to uphold the bylaw. In fact, the City of Toronto has made a lot of efforts to have the complaint tossed out by the Hu- man Rights Tribunal of Ontario, according to recent proceedings. The city began with asking the tribunal for early dismissal of the complaint on Jan. 5, 2012, and again on Feb. 23. It argued the tri- bunal lacked jurisdiction to grant the remedy sought and asked for early dismissal of the group' ure to state a prima facie case. But along the way, the tribunal has re- jected the city' s fail- wanted changes to bylaws that the tribunal couldn't enforce. In response, the applicants altered their complaint to ask for a dec- laration that the respondents had violated the Ontario Hu- man Rights Code and sought orders that would require them to "refrain from enforcing or ap- plying the offending provision of the bylaws or to take steps to bring the bylaws into compli- ance with the code. The city argued the applicants s requests. The tribunal rejected " Ball Professional Corporation Excellence in Employment & Labour Law • Counsel in Leading Cases • • Author of Leading Treatise • Wrongful Dismissal Employment Law Human Rights Post Employment Competition Civil Litigation Appellate Advocacy Disability Referrals on behalf of employees and employers respected 82 Scollard Street, Toronto, Canada, M5R 1G2 (416) 921-7997 ext. 225 or srball@82scollard.com Contact Stacey Ball at web: www.staceyball.com www.lawtimesnews.com all_LT_Nov7_11.indd 1 11-11-08 11:44 AM definitely been slowed down by legal maneuvering on part of the City of Toronto. I think I'm will- ing to be quoted saying that," says Kathy Laird, executive director of the legal support centre. "We're moving ahead now again. I ex- pect we'll be going to a hearing on the merits in the next few months and there will be considerable evidence, including considerable expert evidence. "I would say the process has most parts of Ontario and across the country place various restric- tions on housing for people with disabilities. Oſten, people with disabilities earn low incomes and need to live in supportive housing or group homes. But with the zon- ing restrictions, it can be tough for them to find suitable housing. "There are different kinds of Laird says the zoning bylaws in " restrictions, but one that we find common in many, many munic- ipalities are some kind of separa- tion distances," says Laird. "It limits the available sites." She says the case will argue the restrictions are arbitrary and assert have a negative impact on the communities they're in. "You know, part of the im- that group homes don't pact of the restrictions is that if a group home finds a site that would otherwise be suitable, then oſten there are requirements for public meetings and it' kinds of events that we see a lot discriminatory conduct against people, Henley's case in Napanee, Ont. In the meantime, Laird notes s at these " said Laird in reference to Kitchener and Sarnia are both on the way to relaxing their by- laws to better meet the needs of vulnerable people. Smiths Falls, which has a cap on the number of people with disabilities who can live in group homes there, has said it'll remove the restriction. "It' in the direction of removing the restrictions we were challenging, LT says Laird. s not over yet but it's moving " halt the complaint was un- successful, according to an Aug. 10 decision provided to Law Times by the legal support centre. Superior Court of Justice in March. The court heard arguments on June 28. But the city' s third attempt to s decisions with the

• Cover