Starr v. BMO Financial Group

Starr v. BMO Financial Group

Tribunal found on the balance of probabilities that BMO's secured credit card policy restricting the product to new Canadians/non-permanent residents without a credit history was genuine and race‑neutral, that employees applied the policy and the bank's escalation process correctly, that there was no credible evidence linking the complainant's treatment to his Indigenous identity, and therefore the complaint of discrimination under s.5 CHRA failed and must be dismissed.

Citation
2023 CHRT 54
Parties
Complainant: Clifton Starr; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: BMO Financial Group
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint / Decision (post Hearing)
Outcome
Complaint dismissed
Legal Topics
Race Discrimination, Access to Services, Credit Eligibility, Complaint Escalation
Source Language
English
Human Rights Banking/consumer Finance Administrative Law Race Discrimination Access to Services Credit Eligibility Complaint Escalation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Clifton Starr

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

BMO Financial Group

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint / Decision (post Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether BMO discriminated against the complainant on the basis of race by denying access to a secured credit card
  2. 2 Whether BMO discriminated by refusing to allow the complainant to meet the branch manager
  3. 3 Whether BMO's secured credit card policy or its complaint escalation process were discriminatory

Ratio Decidendi

Tribunal found on the balance of probabilities that BMO's secured credit card policy restricting the product to new Canadians/non-permanent residents without a credit history was genuine and race‑neutral, that employees applied the policy and the bank's escalation process correctly, that there was no credible evidence linking the complainant's treatment to his Indigenous identity, and therefore the complaint of discrimination under s.5 CHRA failed and must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Complaint dismissed

Orders

  • Complaint dismissed