Same-sex couple's discrimination case to go before Alberta human rights tribunal

CBC

13-05-2025

A same-sex couple says it has been a long and stressful four years, but they're hopeful as their discrimination case is set to go before an Alberta human rights tribunal.
Michael Gray and Paul Hemsing allege the City of Medicine Hat discriminated against them by imposing on their home hair salon restrictions that they say other businesses didn't have to follow, along with harassment by officers responding to complaints from neighbours.
The director of the Alberta Human Rights Commission initially dismissed the couple's complaint, but last week acting chief Evaristus Oshionebo referred the case to a tribunal. No date has been set.
Hemsing told The Canadian Press that they want their dignity back.
"We've been in this process now for four years, and we've just been awarded a tribunal," he said Monday from Saskatoon, where the couple now live.
"This is quite emotional and upsetting."
Oshionebo's decision says the couple ran the hair salon in Medicine Hat, southeast of Calgary, and were forced to move the business into their home during the COVID-19 pandemic.
They applied for an operating permit, which imposed limits on hours of operation, how many clients they could see in a week and customer parking on the street, the decision says.
Hemsing said it took months to receive a permit when it was supposed to take a week or two. When they got approval, he added, documents were sent to an address the couple hadn't lived at for 20 years.
They appealed the limit on the number of clients, as it would have limited their income, Hemsing said. They won, but he said he became stressed and also came down with shingles and later COVID-19. He spent days on a ventilator in hospital.
Hemsing said they sold their home and moved to Saskatoon, where they run another salon.
Both men have argued the City of Medicine Hat discriminated against them based on their sexual orientation and that they were treated differently from other home-based businesses.
They also allege officers harassed them by constantly attending their home in response to gripes from neighbours between December 2020 and December 2021.
The complaints from their neighbours, the decision says, were allegedly based on "disapproval of same-sex marriage and that the (city) was or ought to have been aware of this."
The commission's director initially dismissed the couple's complaint, saying it was "not unreasonable" for the city to follow up on the parking grievances.
"It is understandable that (the couple) found contact from inspectors intrusive. However, the information does not support that the city's enforcement actions were excessive or harassing," the director said.
The couple filed for a review and Oshionebo overturned the decision, allowing more evidence on the allegations to be heard.
"The issue of whether the complainants' sexual orientation or marital status were a factor in the attendance of their home-based business by the respondent's officers is a genuine issue that can only be addressed in a full hearing," Oshionebo says in his decision.
"The complainants have alleged some facts, which if proved by evidence, could establish a link between the alleged adverse treatment (the incessant attendance of their business) and the protected ground of sexual orientation."
Lawyers for the city have denied discrimination and argue officers attended the home several times because of numerous calls about an excessive number of vehicles parking near the home salon.
City spokeswoman Colleen Graham said in an email that she can't provide comment as the matter is now the subject of a tribunal.
Hemsing said no one should suffer like they did.
"We lost our home, we lost our business, we had to start new in a new city," he said.