The clinic says it has filed more than 30 requests on behalf of clients without a single approval
More than a year after Tribunals Ontario introduced a program to provide computers and other remote hearing equipment to applicants in need, one of the tribunals it oversees has repeatedly and arbitrarily rejected applicants’ requests for such technology accommodations, a legal clinic alleges.
The Community Advocacy & Legal Centre says it has submitted more than 30 technology accommodation requests to the Social Benefits Tribunal since April 2023, when Tribunals Ontario introduced its Mobile Access Terminal service. CALC says the tribunal, which hears appeals on social security matters, has not approved a single request by the Belleville, Ontario-based legal clinic to date.
In response to a Freedom of Information request filed by CALC this year, Tribunals Ontario said it did not have any policies, procedures, or guidelines to guide its decisions on technology accommodation requests, adjudicating them instead on a case-by-case basis.
“What we were getting back from the denials from the tribunal was just a message from [tribunal] staff, saying that the request was denied,” says Lisa Turik, lawyer and executive director of CALC. “There was no reason, no adjudicator name provided for who had actually made the decision, no clear process to object to any decision that had been made.”
While some of CALC’s clients have access to the needed equipment for remote hearings, Turik estimates that at least half lack the technology. She notes that all the accommodation requests CALC has made since Tribunals Ontario unveiled its program have been for people with disabilities who live below the poverty line and reside in one of the areas the clinic serves, including Hastings, Prince Edward, Lennox and Addington counties, and Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory.
In response to the allegations, Tribunals Ontario addressed the accommodation requests that CALC filed with the SBT in the first year after the program launched, telling Law Times it did not have sufficient information to approve CALC’s requests.
“In each case, they provided no rationale or explanation to support their request for a MAT, despite repeated inquiries on our part for them to better justify their request,” Tribunals Ontario said.
The organization noted that its other tribunals have granted a handful of accommodation requests in the last two years.
“We will continue to focus on enhancing our digital-first model and providing user-friendly services to ensure we deliver strong, accessible, and modern administrative justice,” Tribunals Ontario said.
Before the COVID-19 pandemic, most hearings before the SBT were held in person. The tribunal periodically sent adjudicators to small communities in Ontario, so applicants would not have to travel long distances to attend hearings. When the pandemic hit, the SBT switched to phone hearings before transitioning to hearings over Zoom.
Because many of CALC’s clients didn’t have computers or smartphones, CALC began offering its offices to clients for virtual hearings. “Clients were having to travel to us,” Turik says. “We're dealing with people who are living on low incomes, so a lot of them don't have cars. In our particular communities, there's really no public transit, so sometimes it was very difficult to just get people literally present for their Social Benefits Tribunal hearing.”
Tribunals Ontario introduced the Mobile Access Terminal service in April 2023 for qualified applicants who needed access to equipment for remote hearings. The organization said it would identify an alternative venue near the applicant and provide equipment and an internet connection. The program also promised technical support on the day of the proceeding.
“Our clinic saw the announcement and thought, this is wonderful,” Turik says. “This is really exactly what we've been asking for – a way to help these clients who just don't have the technology actually attend their hearings from closer to home so that they don't have to do the travel.”
CALC began making MAT service requests on behalf of its clients on procedural fairness grounds. However, the requests were repeatedly denied. In some cases, SBT’s responses did not include any reasons for the rejections. In others, the SBT said the applicant could attend their hearing by phone instead – an option Turik does not believe is procedurally fair. “It creates quite a lot of disparities for a client with disabilities, who's living on a low income, to be forced to call into a hearing where counsel, the ministry representative, and the adjudicator are all appearing by video.
“I just fundamentally believe that people have the right to see and to be seen when they're at a hearing,” she says.
In response to CALC’s Freedom of Information request, Tribunals Ontario said SBT received 10 MAT services applications between the program's start and March of this year. Tribunals Ontario confirmed to Law Times that CALC filed all 10 applications.
SBT denied four of those requests and resolved two by offering applicants taxi services to CALC. The tribunal said the remaining four were withdrawn, but Turik says the clinic never withdrew the cases.
MAT service requests at other tribunals were better received: Tribunals Ontario said it granted 12 accommodation requests at other tribunals in 2023 and 2024, including the Landlord and Tenant Board and Child and Family Services Review Board.
In October, CALC filed a complaint with the Ontario Ombudsman, alleging SBT’s “blanket refusal” of MAT service requests without providing reasons or references to policies, procedures, or guidelines violated applicants’ rights to procedural fairness. CALC also alleged that the MAT service’s failure to follow through on its promise of accessibility “fails to adequately address barriers to access to justice.”
Still, Turik says she wants to give credit where credit’s due. “The option of a digital hearing can be a good one for clients who want it,” she says, adding that many of the clinic’s clients are appreciative of the option to attend hearings from home.
“It would be great if this program could just be deployed appropriately to the people who need it,” she adds. “That would actually do a lot to help access to justice with this tribunal.”
