A recent Ontario case refers to what I would call “dual obligations” in the case of a human rights complaint. The Court confirms the obligations of condominium corporations to accommodate a resident’s disability, but the Court also refers to the obligations of the resident who is making the request. The Court says that the resident must not only provide medical proof of the disability, but must also provide “evidence to establish that the accommodation is required”. The Court appears to be saying that the resident must make reasonable efforts to explore any possible alternatives, before coming to the conclusion that the requested accommodation is necessary in order to allow the resident to live in the unit. And the resident must provide some supporting evidence that the requested accommodation is the necessary alternative. Here’s my summary of the case:
Peel Condominium Corporation No. 542 v. Gorgiev (Ontario Superior Court)