Service Animals and Accommodation Practice Questions

Question 1 of 5

A client who is blind asks registrant Tomoko for a listing presentation in an accessible format. Under the AODA, what must Tomoko provide?

• AOnly a verbal summary of the presentation, since this approach would allow the client to review the information independently
• BA Braille version, which is the only acceptable format
• CAn accessible electronic document (such as a properly tagged PDF or Word document compatible with screen readers), provided in a timely manner and at no additional cost — the format should be determined in consultation with the client
• DThe same printed document given to all clients, since providing alternatives would be preferential treatment

Question 2 of 5

A condominium corporation refuses a unit owner's request to install a grab bar in the common-area hallway adjacent to her unit, citing aesthetic concerns. The owner has a mobility disability and the grab bar would cost $200. Which of the following BEST describes the legal position?

• AAesthetic concerns are a valid reason to refuse the accommodation, as the condominium corporation's declaration and by-laws establish the specific governance framework that applies to this particular corporation and its unit owners
• BThe condo corporation has no obligation because the hallway is common property, particularly where the status certificate confirms the corporation's financial position and there are no outstanding litigation or compliance issues
• CThe condo corporation must accommodate the request — a $200 grab bar installation in a hallway does not meet the undue hardship threshold, and aesthetic preference is not a recognized factor in the undue hardship analysis
• DThe owner must pay for the installation herself and restore the hallway when she moves, as the condominium corporation's declaration and by-laws establish the specific governance framework that applies to this particular corporation and its unit owners

Question 3 of 5

A tenant with an accessible parking permit requests a designated accessible parking spot in a condominium that has no designated accessible spaces. The condo corporation board says they cannot 'create something that does not exist.' Who is correct?

• AThe board, because they cannot create parking spaces that were not in the original design, on the basis that duty to accommodate requires creating solutions, not merely working within existing limitations
• BNeither — the municipality must provide the accessible parking, under the governance framework established by the Condominium Act, 1998 and the specific provisions of the corporation's declaration, by-laws, and rules
• CThe tenant is correct — the condo corporation has a duty to accommodate by designating an existing space as accessible (wider, closer to entrance) if the current configuration permits it, or by creating an accessible space through minor modifications; the absence of designated spaces in the original design does not extinguish the duty to accommodate
• DThe tenant must purchase a second parking spot to have enough room for accessibility, in accordance with the standard condominium governance procedures that regulate decision-making, financial management, and maintenance responsibilities

Question 4 of 5

A tenant in recovery from alcohol addiction requests that the landlord not schedule maintenance visits before 10 a.m. to avoid disrupting their morning recovery routine. Is this a valid accommodation request?

• ANo, because addiction is a lifestyle choice, not a disability
• BNo, because maintenance scheduling is entirely at the landlord's discretion
• CYes — addiction is a recognized disability under the Code, and adjusting maintenance scheduling is a low-impact accommodation that is unlikely to constitute undue hardship
• DOnly if the tenant provides proof they are attending a specific treatment program

Question 5 of 5

A condominium corporation's board refuses a unit owner's request to install a wheelchair ramp at the building's side entrance. The board argues that the common elements cannot be altered and that the existing main entrance, which requires navigating three steps, is sufficient. The unit owner, Li Wei, uses a wheelchair and files an HRTO application. What is the most likely outcome?

• AThe HRTO will dismiss the application because condominium common elements are governed by the Condominium Act, 1998, which takes precedence over the Ontario Human Rights Code
• BThe HRTO will find that the board's decision is protected by the business judgment rule applicable to condominium corporations
• CThe HRTO will dismiss the application because Li Wei should have verified the building's accessibility before purchasing the unit
• DThe HRTO will find that the condominium corporation has a duty to accommodate Li Wei's disability-related needs to the point of undue hardship, and that refusing to permit a wheelchair ramp without exploring accommodation options likely violates section 2(1) of the Code