Restaurant found guilty after making Black customers prepay
Judge rules Hong Shing discriminated, business to pay $10K in damages
The Ontario Human Rights Tribunal has ordered a downtown Toronto restaurant to pay $10,000 to a Black man after ruling it discriminated against him by asking the man and his three friends, all Black, to prepay for their meals.
In her ruling released earlier this month, adjudicator Esi Codjoe found Hong Shing Chinese Restaurant discriminated against Emile Wickham, writing in her decision that he “was presumed to be a potential thief in waiting despite any evidence to that effect.”
The restaurant says it is appealing the outcome.
On the night of his 28th birthday, in May 2014, Wickham and three friends went out to the restaurant at Dundas St. and Centre Ave., a block east of University Ave., to celebrate.
Wickham, now 31, at the time a York University student who worked as a legislative usher at the Ontario Legislative Assembly, was born in Trinidad and Tobago and immigrated to Canada more than a decade ago. A decision document in the case describes him as “visibly Black or Afro-Carribean.” All the members of Wickham’s group that night were Black.
According to the decision released on April 18, after the group sat down the server told them they would need to pay in advance of being served their meals. They asked the server whether this was necessary, and the server said it was their policy.
Wickham testified during the tribunal case that he asked patrons in “at least three” other groups if they were asked to do the same. None said they were subject to the same request.
“Upon learning that no other patrons had been asked to prepay for their meals they asked the waiter to explain why they had to pay and no one else had been expected to do so,” the decision says.
“Rather than offer any explanation for the prepayment he simply asked them whether they wanted their money back.”
Representatives from Hong Shing didn’t attend the tribunal hearing. In their defence, they filed a statement that said the restaurant was “very busy and at times short-staffed,” and that because of its location, it attracts “something of a transient crowd” and had encountered issues with the “dine and dash.”
They said it was a years-long policy.
“There was never any intent to discriminate against the applicant; all customers who are not (known) to be regulars are treated the same way,” the restaurant wrote. Codjoe, in her decision, said there was no evidence such a policy existed.