Law360 Canada ( May 16, 2018, 8:38 AM EDT) -- Appeal by the School District from a decision of a Human Rights Tribunal dismissing the appellant’s application to strike the respondent’s complaint as being out of time. The complaint alleged that for six years the School District discriminated against a child by failing to accommodate the child’s educational requirements arising from mental disabilities. The complaint was based on the allegation that the School District’s conduct constituted a continuing contravention that carried forward into the period in which the complaint was filed. The complaint was filed when the child was in grade seven. The child left the school District in grade six. The parent took the position that the complaint was timely because the nature of the discrimination was the School District’s ongoing failure to accommodate the child’s disabilities, a failure that was continuing into the new school year. The Tribunal member held that s. 22(2) of the Human Rights Code applied, but that the continuing state of affairs itself rendered the complaint timely. Section 22(2) provided a basis for reaching back before the six-month period if there had been a continuing contravention, but only if the complaint was filed within six months of the last alleged instance of the contravention. The chambers judge on judicial review confirmed the approach of the Tribunal member that the complaint was timely for the sole reason that it constituted a continuing contravention....