Polhill v. Keeseekoowenin First Nation

Polhill v. Keeseekoowenin First Nation

On the balance of probabilities the complainant failed to prove that any adverse impacts (termination/interruption of income assistance, housing effects, alleged harassment or the assortment of incidents claimed as retaliation) were caused or motivated by prohibited grounds (race or national/ethnic origin). The band council resolution that interrupted benefits was not shown to be based on discriminatory considerations, the Nation’s employees who handled benefits acted within administrative roles, and the evidence did not establish that alleged retaliatory events were attributable to the Nation or precipitated by the filing of the complaint; accordingly the complaint is dismissed in its...

Citation
2019 CHRT 42
Parties
Complainant: Tracy Polhill; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Keeseekoowenin First Nation
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint / Final Decision
Outcome
Complaint dismissed in its entirety.
Legal Topics
Race Discrimination, National or Ethnic Origin, Provision of Services, Residential Accommodation, Harassment, Retaliation, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
English
Human Rights Administrative Law Indigenous Law Race Discrimination National or Ethnic Origin Provision of Services Residential Accommodation Harassment +2 more

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tracy Polhill

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Keeseekoowenin First Nation

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether complainant had prohibited grounds (race; national or ethnic origin)
  2. 2 Whether complainant suffered adverse impacts (denial of services; residential accommodation; harassment; retaliation)
  3. 3 Whether prohibited grounds were a factor in adverse impacts

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the complainant failed to prove that any adverse impacts (termination/interruption of income assistance, housing effects, alleged harassment or the assortment of incidents claimed as retaliation) were caused or motivated by prohibited grounds (race or national/ethnic origin). The band council resolution that interrupted benefits was not shown to be based on discriminatory considerations, the Nation’s employees who handled benefits acted within administrative roles, and the evidence did not establish that alleged retaliatory events were attributable to the Nation or precipitated by the filing of the complaint; accordingly the complaint is dismissed in its...

Court Disposition

Complaint dismissed in its entirety.

Orders

  • Complaint dismissed in its entirety
  • No remedies awarded