A legal action initiated by a Muslim charity claims that a landlord terminated a newly negotiated lease agreement with the organization following Islamophobic remarks made by a Hamilton pastor, who leads a church planning to share the premises.
The Toledo Foundation had intended to use the new space for its Islamic school, and the cancellation has affected numerous children who had anticipated attending this fall.
The lawsuit, filed on September 17 in the Ontario Superior Court, targets Great Life Church and the property company, identified as 1000568865 ONTARIO INC., which owns the building housing the church in Stoney Creek, a neighborhood in Hamilton.
The charity asserts that the church and the company violated its human rights by allegedly breaching a lease agreement and allowing the church’s influence to impact the decision to lease the space, suggesting bad faith. Consequently, the charity is seeking economic damages.
Muneeza Sheikh, the founding partner of Muneeza Sheikh Employment & Human Rights, representing the foundation, emphasized that the case transcends Islamophobia in Canada, highlighting the broader implications on Canadian values of diversity, inclusion, and acceptance.
Responding to the human rights allegations, the property company’s counsel, James Tuck, refuted the claims as false and defamatory, pledging a robust defense and potential countersuit against the foundation.
Efforts to obtain comments from the church regarding the pastor’s statements and the lawsuit were unavailing at the time of publication.
None of the claims made in the lawsuit have been legally tested.
Video Sermon During Lease Negotiations
A video sermon, subsequently removed, posted on a YouTube channel on August 24 under the alias Dr. Peter Marshall, featured the pastor addressing his congregation about a perceived conflict.
The pastor expressed opposition to an Islamic group seeking to share the building with the church, citing concerns about the religious affiliation and purported intentions of the group.
The pastor’s statements align with those made by the pastor listed on the church’s website, discussing the church’s resistance to accommodating the Islamic faith in the shared space.
The pastor alleged pressure from the foundation and mentioned plans for a Christian school, soliciting financial support from the congregation for the church’s potential acquisition of the space.
Muneeza Sheikh condemned the pastor’s comments as hateful and Islamophobic, emphasizing the divisive impact and violation of human rights legislation.
‘Concern for Children’s Education’
The Toledo Foundation, focused on Muslim youth and educational programs, aimed to lease part of a former public school building, now utilized by Great Life Church in Stoney Creek.
The foundation’s plan to lease the vacant section of the building for its Islamic school was thwarted by alleged interference from the church, leading to a loss of educational opportunities for children.
The lawsuit contends that the church’s actions disrupted the foundation’s plans, affecting the potential enrollment of approximately 100 additional students.
Despite securing an alternative space before the school year commenced, the foundation lamented the impact on parents seeking to enroll their children in the Islamic school.
Exclusive Rights and Lease Dispute
Following the signing of a lease agreement and a deposit in late July, the foundation faced uncertainty as the property company delayed responses and introduced new conditions.
As tensions escalated, the foundation rejected a revised agreement and urged compliance with the original terms, highlighting the church’s sudden interest in the property as a complicating factor.
The foundation’s enhanced offer was met with indecision from the company, resulting in a lack of clarity days before the school year’s commencement.
James Tuck clarified the company’s intention to address all legal and commercial aspects of the lease, emphasizing the church’s exclusive rights for Sunday worship services as a potential conflict with the foundation’s proposed use of the space.
Tuck disavowed any responsibility for the pastor’s statements and asserted that the video content did not influence the company’s decision-making process.