Previous 26 / 26 Next

For the Complainant No one appearing For the Canadian Human Rights Commission Andrew Lokan Maya Bhusari For the Respondent Ivana Petricone Kerri Joffe Amy Spady For the Interested Party 2010 CHRT 4 (CanLII) Kate A. Hughes Janet Borowy

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Hughes v. Human Rights Commission

Judgment

Alleged Acts: Hughes alleged that his right to vote was infringed upon on account of his disability on two occasions. Hughes has post-polio syndrome and uses a wheelchair or a walker. The accessible entrance was locked and Hughes was unable to get in. An election official then came over to Hughes and told him he could go down the stairs on “seat of his pants” with the walker. Hughes then went down the hall to the basement where the polling tables were too close together so the workers had to rearrange them for Hughes. During his departure, Hughes was assisted by a worker to a different exit that was steep and cover by snow. When Hugh returned to the same polling station in 2008, he experienced similar circumstances.

Procedural history: At the polling station made a verbal complaint. Against on March 20, 2008, Hughes again filed a written complaint.

Summary: The complainant was not given barrier-free access to the voting entrance under the Canadian election code. Further, the complaint and the corresponding written complaint were not treated properly and the Electoral Commission did not act take proper action to remedy the polling center. The Electoral Commission’s response indicated that all three entrances were open an accessible, but the testimony presented indicated facts to the contrary.

Conclusion: The Electoral Commission is liable for Hughes inability to vote and injuries incurred therein. Thus, the court awarded damages for pain and suffering plus interest.

Legal Issue(s)

Accessibility

Region: Americas

Country: Canada

Language of Decision

English

Court: Human Rights Court

Election Type: General

Date of decision: Feb 12, 2010

Geolocation

Latitude: 45.42663839

Longitude: -75.81085498225116

: Geolocation

Primary Documents

Hughes v. Human Rights Commission.pdf
English
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

Hughes v. Human Rights Commission

Primary Documents

Notifications