Human Rights, Accessibility, and Discrimination for Ontario Realtors

Ontario realtors are bound by human rights law on two independent tracks that both apply at once:

The Human Rights Code — provincial law prohibiting discrimination in the occupancy of accommodation (housing) and in services, goods and facilities (which includes real estate services). This is the primary legal exposure.
The TRESA Code of Ethics + RECO conduct rules — professional obligations that independently discipline discriminatory conduct through RECO, even where no Human Rights Code complaint is filed.

Breaching human rights obligations can trigger an HRTO application (with monetary and non-monetary remedies), a RECO disciplinary proceeding, brokerage liability, and reputational harm — often simultaneously.

The Ontario Human Rights Code — the core rules

Protected grounds

Under the Code, no one may be discriminated against on the basis of these prohibited grounds. In housing (occupancy of accommodation) and services, the grounds include:

Race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed (religion)
Sex (including pregnancy and breastfeeding), sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression
Age (18 and over for most purposes; note the special rule below)
Marital status (including a common-law relationship) and family status (parent-child type relationships, including having or planning to have children)
Disability (broadly defined — physical, mental, developmental, learning, addictions, and perceived disability)
Receipt of public assistance — this ground applies specifically to the occupancy of accommodation (housing). It protects tenants who rely on Ontario Works, ODSP, subsidies, pensions, etc.

Age in housing: the "18 and over" floor means the Code does not stop, for example, restricting occupancy to adults in some narrow contexts — but you must not assume this permits age-based refusals generally. Confirm the specific provision (Code ss. 2, 4) before relying on it.

The two operative sections a realtor lives under

Section 2 — accommodation: the right to equal treatment with respect to the occupancy of accommodation without discrimination, and the right to be free from harassment by a landlord/agent or occupant.
Section 1 — services: the right to equal treatment with respect to services, goods and facilities. Providing real estate brokerage services is a service under s. 1, so how you treat buyers, sellers, and the public is itself covered, on top of the housing rules.

Reprisal and harassment

Section 8 prohibits reprisal — you cannot penalize or threaten someone for asserting a Code right (e.g., a tenant who requested an accommodation, or a buyer who complained of discriminatory treatment). Harassment on a protected ground in housing is separately prohibited.

Discriminatory instructions — you cannot follow a client's bias

A realtor is a service provider and, in leasing, an agent of the landlord — you are liable in your own right and can be named at the HRTO alongside the client.

You may not act on a discriminatory instruction from a seller, landlord, or buyer. "Don't show my listing to families with kids," "screen out anyone on ODSP," "I only want to sell to a [particular ethnicity/religion]," "no wheelchair users," "find me a building with no children" — following any of these is itself a Code breach by you and a TRESA violation.
You cannot contract out of the Code. A clause, verbal request, or "preference" does not make discrimination lawful.
The right move: decline the instruction, explain plainly that it is unlawful and that you cannot act on it, document that you declined, and escalate to your broker of record. If the client insists, the brokerage may need to end the relationship rather than execute an illegal instruction.

Rental screening — do / don't

Landlords may choose tenants using legitimate, non-discriminatory business criteria, but the OHRC's rental-housing policy sharply limits how. Realtors assisting with leasing must apply these rules.

Permitted (when applied consistently to everyone)

Income information, credit checks, credit references, rental history, and guarantors — but only as permitted by O. Reg. 290/98 under the Code, and only in a way that does not screen out protected groups. The regulation lets a landlord consider these, and permits requiring a last month's rent deposit and using income information — provided it is not used to discriminate on a Code ground.
A rent-to-income ratio may not be used on its own to refuse a tenant. The OHRC's position is that arbitrary rent-to-income cut-offs (e.g., "rent must be under 30% of income") disproportionately exclude protected groups and are not a reliable predictor of default; where credit/income info is available, business criteria must be assessed as a whole, not on a single ratio.

Prohibited

Refusing or steering based on family status — e.g., "no children," rejecting a family because of children's noise, or applying occupancy limits that exceed genuine health/safety standards.
Refusing an applicant because their income is from public assistance (Ontario Works, ODSP, disability benefits, pensions, subsidies) — this is the receipt of public assistance ground.
Requiring a higher deposit, guarantor, or income multiple only from applicants of a certain background, newcomers, students perceived by ethnicity, single parents, etc.
"No pets" applied against a service animal — see service animals below; a service animal is not a "pet."
Screening out applicants because they have a disability, are pregnant, are newcomers / lack Canadian credit history, or on any other protected ground.

Practical guardrail

Apply the same documented criteria to every applicant, keep records of why an applicant was chosen or declined, and never let a protected characteristic enter the decision. Inconsistency is what most often exposes discrimination.

Accommodation and accessibility — the duty to accommodate

The duty (Code) and AODA (customer service)

The Code imposes a duty to accommodate disability and other Code-related needs to the point of undue hardship — measured only by (a) cost, (b) outside sources of funding, and (c) health and safety. Inconvenience, business preference, customer/tenant complaints, or discomfort are not undue hardship.

Separately, under AODA and the Integrated Accessibility Standards Regulation, real estate businesses that provide goods, services, or facilities must meet accessibility standards — including the customer service obligations: welcoming service animals and support persons, providing accessible ways to communicate, notifying clients of temporary service disruptions, and (for larger organizations) training and accessibility policies. AODA sets a service floor; the Code duty to accommodate goes further and is individualized.

Accommodation in showings and real estate services

Offer and provide accessible showings: step-free routes where possible, flexible timing, additional time, a support person present, clear large-print or plain-language documents, virtual/video tours where an in-person visit is a barrier.
Communicate in the client's accessible format on request (large print, email, read-aloud, etc.).
Do not require someone to disclose the nature or diagnosis of a disability to receive service — you may only ask for information needed to provide the accommodation.
Treat an accommodation request as a collaborative process: the client identifies the need, you explore reasonable options, and you don't demand a "perfect" solution over a workable one.

Accommodation in housing services

When helping a tenant or buyer with a disability, support reasonable modifications (grab bars, ramps, unit transfers, parking near an entrance, permission to make accessibility alterations) and route requests to the landlord/condo with the accommodation framing — the housing provider carries the duty to accommodate to undue hardship.

Service animals

A service animal is not a pet. "No-pet" rules, pet deposits, and pet fees cannot be applied to a service animal, and a guide dog / service animal must be permitted in housing and in the provision of services regardless of a no-pets policy.
Under AODA customer-service rules, if it is readily apparent the animal is a service animal, you may not ask for documentation; if it is not readily apparent, you may ask for a letter from a regulated health professional confirming the animal is required because of a disability — nothing more, and never the diagnosis.
Emotional support / assistance animals: even where an animal doesn't meet the strict AODA "service animal" definition, the Human Rights Code duty to accommodate a disability can still require allowing it in housing. Treat blanket refusals as a legal risk and route to accommodation analysis, not an automatic "no."
Note the interaction with the Residential Tenancies Act: "no-pet" provisions in leases are generally void in Ontario, and service-animal protections add a further Code overlay. See the tenancy reference for RTA specifics.

Ground-by-ground flashpoints

Family status: "adult-only" buildings, refusing families with children, occupancy limits used as a proxy to exclude children, or steering families away from certain buildings/neighbourhoods — all high-risk. Genuine, uniformly applied health-and-safety occupancy standards are the only defensible basis.
Disability: refusing showings, refusing modifications, demanding medical diagnoses, or treating a service/support animal as a pet.
Race / ancestry / place of origin / ethnic origin / colour / creed: steering ("you'd be more comfortable in X neighbourhood"), differential service, coded language in ads, or acting on a client's ethnic/religious preference. Steering — directing buyers toward or away from areas based on the demographic makeup — is discrimination even when framed as "helpful."
Age: refusing service or housing based on age (18+); assumptions about students or seniors.
Receipt of public assistance / source of income: refusing tenants on ODSP/OW, or requiring proof of employment income specifically. Benefits income is lawful income.
Sex / pregnancy / gender identity / gender expression / sexual orientation / marital status: refusing a pregnant applicant, misgendering or refusing to use a client's correct name/pronouns, or treating single vs. married applicants differently.

Advertising language

Advertising is a service and is also governed by the TRESA Code of Ethics and RECO advertising rules. Property and rental ads must not express, directly or by implication, a preference, limitation, or specification based on a protected ground.

Don't publish

"Adult building," "no children," "ideal for a single professional," "mature tenants" (family status / age).
"Christian home," "suits a [nationality] family," "English-speaking only," references to a church/temple/mosque nearby as a selling point aimed at one group (creed / origin).
"No pets" phrased so as to exclude service animals; "must be able to climb stairs" as a blanket tenant requirement (disability).
"Employed applicants only," "no ODSP / no OW / no assistance" (receipt of public assistance).
"Preferred applicant" language that signals a demographic.

Do instead

Describe the property and objective, uniformly-applied terms, never the desired occupant's characteristics:

Family status → describe layout: "2-bedroom unit," "quiet street," not "no kids."
Disability → describe features factually: "unit is on the third floor, no elevator," so the applicant can self-assess, not "must climb stairs."
Income → "credit check and references required" applied to all, not "employed only."
Amenities → "close to transit, schools, parks" — neutral facts, not group-targeted signals.

Scenarios and compliant alternatives

Landlord says "no families with children." → Decline: "I can't screen for that — family status is protected under the Human Rights Code and it would breach both the Code and my TRESA obligations." Market the unit on neutral terms and screen every applicant on the same lawful criteria. Document your refusal to comply and tell your broker.
Seller says "only show my house to buyers like us." (ethnic/religious preference) → Explain you cannot restrict showings on a protected ground; doing so is discrimination in a service and grounds for RECO discipline. Continue to market to all qualified buyers.
Applicant on ODSP; landlord wants to reject for "unstable income." → Benefit income is protected income (receipt of public assistance). Assess the whole application (credit, references, history) on the same standard as everyone; a rent-to-income ratio alone can't be the basis for refusal.
Buyer with a wheelchair asks for accessible viewings. → Arrange step-free access where possible, allow extra time and a support person, offer a video walkthrough for inaccessible units, and don't ask for a diagnosis. This is the duty to accommodate, not a favour.
Tenant applicant has a service dog; building is "no pets." → A service animal is not a pet; no-pet rules and pet fees don't apply. If the need isn't apparent you may request a health-professional letter confirming disability-related need — not the diagnosis.
Client asks you to word an ad "adult-oriented, no ODSP." → Refuse and rewrite to neutral, property-focused language. Publishing it would breach the Code and RECO advertising rules and could expose you and the brokerage.
Support (emotional) animal, not a strict AODA "service animal." → Don't auto-refuse; the Code disability duty to accommodate can still require allowing it in housing. Route to accommodation analysis.

Escalation checklist

When a human-rights or accessibility issue surfaces, work through this in order:

Pause the discriminatory step. Do not execute the instruction, ad, or refusal.
Name it plainly to the client: which protected ground is engaged and why the action is unlawful under the Code (and a TRESA breach). Use the no-push-back register — state the substance directly, don't editorialize.
Offer the compliant alternative (neutral ad wording, uniform screening criteria, an accommodation) so the client still gets served lawfully.
Document the request, your advice, and your refusal to comply — dated notes protect you and the brokerage.
Escalate to the broker of record. Discriminatory-instruction situations are brokerage-level decisions, including whether to end the client relationship.
For accommodation requests, engage the individualized duty-to-accommodate process; explore options to the point of undue hardship (cost, funding, health/safety only).
If a complaint is threatened or filed, notify the brokerage and, where warranted, obtain legal advice; the affected person can apply to the HRTO (generally within one year) and may also contact the OHRC for policy resources.
Never retaliate against someone for asserting a Code right — reprisal is a separate, independent violation (Code s. 8).

Assistant response guardrails

For the AI assistant answering realtor questions in this domain:

Never draft, endorse, or "clean up" discriminatory content. If asked to screen out, steer, or word an ad against a protected ground, refuse the discriminatory element and offer a lawful, neutral alternative instead.
Default to the Code + AODA + TRESA framing. Treat family status, disability, receipt of public assistance, race/creed/origin, age, sex/gender, and marital status as protected and flag anything touching them.
Flag service-animal and accommodation issues as duty-to-accommodate matters, not landlord discretion; don't let a "no-pets" or "no-modifications" premise pass unchallenged.
Don't give a false all-clear. Human-rights outcomes are fact-specific; qualify advice and recommend the broker of record and, for live disputes, legal counsel / the HRTO.
Distinguish lawful business screening from prohibited screening — uniform credit/reference/history checks applied to everyone are fine; single-ratio income cut-offs and any protected-ground factor are not.
Cite the primary sources (Human Rights Code, OHRC policies, AODA, TRESA/RECO) and remind the user this is reference material, not legal advice.
Escalate, don't improvise, on any accommodation dispute, threatened complaint, or discriminatory instruction: route to the brokerage and appropriate professionals.