Categories:
Discrimination
Case Study
You and your teenage daughter live in an apartment building that doesn’t allow pets. Your daughter has depression and anxiety. This means she often has trouble focusing, memory lapses, brain fog, difficulty planning, panic attacks and suicidal thoughts. Your daughter’s doctor thinks having a dog might help her manage her disabilities. The doctor writes a note about your daughter’s medical need for a dog and you take it to your landlord. You ask them to make an exception to the no-pets rule so your daughter can have a dog. The landlord says that there are no exceptions to the no-pets rule.1
-
Is your daughter experiencing discrimination?
Yes. Your daughter has a disability, which is a part of her identity protected by the Code. The no-pets rule has a negative impact on your daughter because it limits her ability to manage her mental health issues. Just because a rule is applied to everyone in the same way does not make it non-discriminatory. Your landlord is required to accommodate your daughter’s disability unless they can show that providing this accommodation would cause them undue hardship. However, the landlord has not offered any explanation about why making an exception to the rule for your family would cause undue hardship.
12020 BCHRT 105 (CanLII) | Daughter by Parent v. The Owners, A Strata | CanLII