FILE PHOTO.

Image Credit: pexels.com

For the first time since the pandemic began, a person has won the first stage of a Human Rights Tribunal case after being refused entrance into a store for not wearing a mask.

The store applied to the Human Rights Tribunal to dismiss the woman's complaint but lost.

The minor victory does not mean the woman has won the case, but the Human Rights Tribunal decided there is enough evidence for the case to go to a hearing.

According to a Feb. 1 B.C. Human Rights Tribunal hearing, Nancy Vero attempted to enter an undisclosed Uniqlo store in August 2020 without wearing a mask.

A staff member asked her to put a mask on but she said she had a medical exemption and showed an "exemption card." The decision does not say what this exemption card was.

Vero asked if a doctor’s note would suffice and the employee said no.

A store representative said they would "love to" assist Vero in her shopping or offer her free shipping online, but the Tribunal points out this was only offered after the incident.

The company also says it has changed its mask policy following the complaint.

READ MORE: Another anti-masker loses Human Rights Tribunal case

According to the decision, Vero has post-traumatic stress disorder and submitted a letter from her doctor setting out a "medical exemption" as evidence.

Previous Human Rights Tribunal cases involving people not wearing masks have failed after anti-maskers argued masks were "pointless" or refused to disclose what their disability was.

The Tribunal pointed out that unlike other cases, Uniqlo didn't offer Vero any accommodations, such as online shopping, or allow her to wait at the door while an assistant brought her items.

"The evidence before me does not support a finding that this happened," the Tribunal ruled.

However, the Tribunal also pointed out having a medical exemption and not being able to wear a mask doesn't mean a person is entitled to enter the store without a mask.

"Rather, it requires the respondent to reasonably accommodate the complainant to try to mitigate that barrier," the Tribunal said.

Ultimately, the Tribunal ruled that because Uniqlo hadn't offered any accommodations, and Vero had submitted evidence of a disability, there was enough evidence for the case to go a hearing.

Whether a hearing will take place remains to be seen, because it's very common for cases to be settled early.

READ MORE: Anti-maskers lose their cases at B.C. Human Rights Tribunal

To contact a reporter for this story, email Ben Bulmer or call (250) 309-5230 or email the editor. You can also submit photos, videos or news tips to the newsroom and be entered to win a monthly prize draw.

We welcome your comments and opinions on our stories but play nice. We won't censor or delete comments unless they contain off-topic statements or links, unnecessary vulgarity, false facts, spam or obviously fake profiles. If you have any concerns about what you see in comments, email the editor in the link above. 

News from © iNFOnews, 2022