Service dogs and guide dogs

The courts have recognized that service dogs and guide dogs as a means of palliating a handicap. The first court decision in Québec which upheld the prohibition of discriminating against persons who use a guide dog dates back to 1982.

English language translations are provided when available.

2015 The Québec Court of Appeal finds that the parents of a child with a pervasive developmental disorder (PDD) who use a service dog to palliate its disability are protected by the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms and must have access to public places when accompanied by the dog, even in the absence of the child.
- News release on the Court of appeal judgement
2013 In cooperation with the Fondation Mira, the Commission releases an information leaflet on service dogs and guide dogs.
- Leaflet on service dogs and guide dogs/span>
2011 The Commission concludes that Service dogs for children with Pervasive Developmental Disorders (PDD) constitute a means to palliate a disability.
- News release on service dogs for children with Pervasive Developmental Disorders
- Avis sur le chien d'assistance comme moyen pour pallier le handicap des enfants présentant un trouble envahissant du développement (PDF, 227 Ko)
2007 The Commission finds that a service dog is a means to palliate the disability of a deaf or hearing impaired person.
- Avis sur le chien d’assistance qui constitue un moyen pour pallier le handicap des personnes sourdes ou malentendantes (PDF, 300 Ko)

English language translations are provided when available.

2015: An important legal victory for parents of autistic children who use a service dog to palliate a disability
2012: Refus d’un chien d’assistance dans un restaurant : Un client handicapé sera dédommagé (PDF, 137 Ko)
2011: Handicap et chien d’accompagnement : Un usager d’un terrain de camping sera dédommagé (PDF, 19 Ko)
2009: Entente novatrice pour l’admission des chiens-guides ou d’assistance au Zoo de Granby (PDF, 26 Ko)

CDPDJ c. Côté (2015)
The Québec Court of Appeal found that the parents of an autistic child who use a service dog to palliate its disability are protected by the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms and must have access to public places when accompanied by the dog, even in the absence of the child.
CDPDJ c. Bar La Divergence (1994) (in French only)
The owners of a disco-bar refused access to a blind person because she was accompanied by a guide dog. They were required to pay $3,000 to the victim.
CDPDJ c. Quillorama de l'Anse inc. et Roger Ouellet (1998) (in French only)
Quillorama de l'Anse inc. and its owner were ordered to pay $500 to a disabled customer to whom they had refused access because she was with a service dog.
CDPDJ (Sylvain Lemay) c. Coopérative de taxis de Montréal (2008) (in French only)
A taxi driver and a taxi company were ordered to pay $5,000 to a disabled man for refusing to transport him because he was accompanied by a service dog. The taxi company also had to establish a non-discrimination policy, particularly on the basis of handicap.
CDPDJ (Michel Larochelle) c. Montuori Holdings Corporation et Pellegrino Montuori (2008) (in French only)
A waiter refused to serve a disabled man accompanied by his service dog because he was allergic to dogs. The waiter and Montuori Holdings Corporation were ordered to pay $4,000 to the complainant.

Fondation Mira (in French only)
Kéroul (in French only)

Did you know?

The courts have established that disabled people can choose the means of their choice to compensate their disability, whether a service dog, a wheelchair or both means.