7/11/2022 – Jurisdiction Ontario
Part 80 published on 01/12/2022
Resident with a disability permitted to keep her dog.
The parties agreed that the resident needed a dog because of the resident’s disability. However, the condominium corporation argued that a smaller dog that complied with the condominium corporation’s rules could meet this need.
The resident argued that she needed to keep her own dog (which was a German Sheppard that exceeded the 25-pound weight limit in the condominium corporation’s rules and also was a prohibited breed under the corporation’s rules).
The Tribunal agreed with the resident.
The Tribunal began by saying that a smaller dog, of a different breed, could meet the resident’s needs. The Tribunal said that reports and letters submitted into evidence “do not specifically state that her needs must be met by a dog that weighs more than 25 pounds, or that a breed such as German Shepherd is necessary”.
But the Tribunal went on to state as follows:
However, contrary to the Applicant’s view, I find that what the letters and reports – particularly the most detailed report dated July 18, 2021 – do demonstrate is that King (the dog) itself is necessary for the Respondent. By way of example, the letter dated August 20, 2021, expressly states that King is “indispensable” to the Respondent for addressing her particular needs. In general, the reports appear to support this notion, and I am not prepared to substitute my or the Applicant’s non-expert assessment for that of the several qualified professionals whose letters and reports have been entered into evidence.
I am persuaded by the accumulation of such materials and other evidence in this case that, on at least a balance of probabilities, the Respondent’s desire to keep King is not merely a matter of preference, but that King is indispensable to the Respondent to meet her needs for which she is entitled to accommodation and that King could not simply be replaced by another dog. I therefore find that the Respondent’s requested accommodation – i.e., to keep King in the condominium –is the accommodation to which she is entitled under the (Human Rights Code).
York Region Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1375 v. Sousa
The Tribunal went on to find that there was no undue hardship to the condominium corporation (if the resident kept the dog).