Tanudjaja et al v Canada et al: the Claim
Charter Challenge to Homelessness and Violations of the Right to Adequate Housing in Canada
Tanudjaja, CERA et al. v Canada and Ontario
The AGs of Canada and Ontario filed a motion to dismiss this case without a hearing into the evidence on June 11th, 2012. Check out the Motion to Dismiss page here. The appeal against the motion to dismiss was heard in the Ontario Court of Appeal May 26-27, 2014.
For a succinct overview of the case see: Ammended Notice of Application.
CURA community partners, the Social Rights Advocacy Centre and Centre for Equality Rights in Accommodation (CERA), have engaged in extensive legal research and evidentiary support for this historic challenge to homelessness and violations of the right to adequate housing in Canada. The challenge has been launched by a broad coalition of organizations and individuals affected by homelessness and inadequate housing.
The Notice of Application was filed in Ontario Superior Court on April 26, 2010 by CERA along with claimants Jennifer Tanudjaja, Janice Arsenault, Ansar Mahmood and Brian Dubourdieu. The case represents a significant advance in social rights practice in Canada both because of the nature of what is challenged and the remedy that is sought. The claim does not challenge a particular legislative provision or government action but rather the failure of two levels of government to develop and implement housing strategies to effectively address homelessness.
The Ontario and Canadian governments have failed to respond to repeated and urgent recommendations from United Nations human rights bodies, human rights commissions and a range of experts urging these governments to implement comprehensive housing strategies based on the right to adequate housing and including firm goals and timetables for eliminating homelessness.
This is the first case in which the remedy sought in a Charter or human rights challenge in Canada is consistent with the comprehensive plan to implement and realize a social right in accordance with international human rights obligations.
The litigation initiative has been accompanied by widespread mobilization among stakeholders and civil society campaigning for political response. This has resulted in legislative initiatives both federally and provincially which, if successful, would have provided the remedy sought in the litigation. The case thus provides fertile ground for better understanding the relationship between legal and political strategies to implement social rights.