Hyperlawhypertext legal database Bell v. Ontario Human Rights Com'n. [1971] SCR 756

← Cases

Bell v. Ontario Human Rights Com'n.

[1971] SCR 756 Court SCC Decision date 1971-02-01 English

PartiesKenneth S. Bell (Plaignant) Appelant·The Ontario Human Rights Commission (Défendeur) Intimée

Counsel (4)
R. N. Starr, Q.C., and W. C. Cuttell, Q.C., for the appellant.
F. W. Callaghan, Q.C., and E. M. Pollock, for the respondent.
Solicitor for the appellant: William C. Cuttell, Toronto.
Solicitor for the respondent: F. W. Callaghan, Toronto.

Judges Fauteux, Joseph Honoré Gérald; Abbott, Douglas Charles; Martland, Ronald; Judson, Wilfred; Ritchie, Roland Almon; Hall, Emmett Matthew; Spence, Wishart Flett

Delivered by Majority

On appeal from Ontario

Subjects Administrative law

Contents

The judgment of Fauteux C.J. and Martland, Judson, Ritchie and Spence JJ. was delivered by

I am the owner of No. 30 Indian Road, Toronto and have lived at that address since 1957. From 1957 to 1965 I rented the lower floor of the house and lived there with my wife, during which time the owner and his wife and child occupied the upper floors.
I bought the house in 1965 and continued to live on the lower floor as before and rented the upper floors.
The upper floors consist of a flat which has its own kitchen and bathroom, a bedroom and sitting room all on the second floor and a bedroom on the third floor; the flat has no separate entrance.
The tenants can only get to the upper floors by entering the house through the front door and hall-way and thus reaching the stairs. The hallway and stairway are not closed or separated from my living quarters.
Annexed to this affidavit are photographs of the said hallway and stairs. Photograph Numbered 1 is a view of the lower floor and shows my kitchen at the end of the hallway. Photograph numbered 2 is a view of the lower floor and shows the entrance to my living room. Photograph numbered 3 is a view of the second floor and shows the hallway of the tenants quarters and a stairway leading to the third floor room.
There are no locks on the doors of the tenants quarters and I have only an ordinary skeleton key operated lock set on the glass doors leading to my living room and a bolt on the kitchen door. I have never used the locks on my doors since 1965.
I am employed by Christie Bread Division of Nabisco as a shipper and I have been in that job for 18 years. I work regularly on three shifts which require me to be away from home sometimes on the 4 to 12 shift or the 12 to 8 shift, during which times my wife is alone in the house. For this reason I have to be careful about the kind of tenant I take in for the upper floors.
I have had four different tenants since 1965. Three of these have been married couples and the present tenant is a man of about 45 years of age. He is of Egyptian origin and is Semitic. I prefer to take as tenants only married couples or mature people.
On or about the 10th of December, 1968, when the flat was advertised for rent, two young negro men came to the house to inquire about it. I judged

[Page 766]

them to be about 20 to 22 years of age and thought they may have been students. I considered them to be too young and accordingly, I turned them down. I told them the flat had been previously rented because this is the simplest method and avoids discus­sion and argument.
I did not refuse to rent to the negroes because they were negroes but because they were too young and appeared to be students and I do not want young men or students as tenants, particularly because the flat is not separated from my own living quarters and is not self contained.

Footnotes

  1. [1] Sub nom. R. v. Tarnopolsky, Ex p. Bell, [1970] 2 O.R. 672, 11 D.L.R. (3d) 658.
  2. [2] (1923), 129 L.T. 441.
  3. [3] [1957] 1 Q.13. 103.
  4. [4] (1949), 77 C.L.R. 432
  5. [5] [1952] 1 All E.R. 122 at 131.
  6. [6] [1955] 3 D.L.R. 297 at 300.
  7. [7] [1965] S.C.R. 12.
  8. [8] [1969] S.C.R. 577.