The ATPDR bind federally regulated carriers — airlines, VIA Rail, interprovincial ferries and bus lines — and the terminals that serve them. The duty to carry is unconditional; what a carrier may ask for is not.

“service dog means a dog that has been individually trained by an organization or person specializing in service dog training to perform a task to assist a person with a disability with a need related to their disability.”

SOR/2019-244, s. 1 (definitions)

“51 (1) A carrier must, on the request of a person with a disability who needs to travel with a service dog, accept the service dog for transport and permit the animal to accompany the person on board, subject to subsection (2).”

“(2) A carrier may require a person with a disability who requests to travel with a service dog to control the dog with a leash, tether or harness during travel and to provide (a) at the time that the person with a disability makes the reservation with the carrier, a declaration attesting that the service dog has been individually trained by an organization or person specializing in service dog training to perform a task to assist the person with a disability with a need related to their disability; and (b) before departure, an identification card or other document that is issued by an organization or person specializing in service dog training that identifies the person with a disability and attests that the service dog has been individually trained …”

SOR/2019-244, s. 51(1)–(2)

• The definition turns on who trained the dog. “An organization or person specializing in service dog training.” An owner-trained dog has a materially weaker position in Canadian federal transport than under the ACAA.
• Two documents, at two moments. A declaration at booking; an ID card or document from the training organisation before departure. Carry both.
• This is the setting where a program certificate matters most. Our team verification exists for exactly this request.
• Complaints go to the Canadian Transportation Agency, which administers the ATPDR and can order remedies.

“3 (1) For all purposes of this Act, the prohibited grounds of discrimination are race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, genetic characteristics, disability and conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted …”

“5 It is a discriminatory practice in the provision of goods, services, facilities or accommodation customarily available to the general public (a) to deny, or to deny access to, any such good, service, facility or accommodation to any individual, or (b) to differentiate adversely in relation to any individual, on a prohibited ground of discrimination.”

Canadian Human Rights Act, ss. 3(1), 5; s. 6 applies the same rule to commercial premises and residential accommodation

These sections bind federally regulated providers — banks, telecoms, airlines, interprovincial carriers, federal departments. Refusing a service dog is analysed as a failure to accommodate to the point of undue hardship; the Tribunal’s remedies are on the penalties page. The Accessible Canada Act adds a proactive duty on federal entities to identify and remove barriers. Complaints to the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

BC is the clearest example of a province doing what the ADA forbids: it certifies teams. A certified team gets a statutory right of access; an uncertified handler falls back on the Human Rights Code, which the Act expressly preserves.

“2 (1) A guide dog team, service dog team or dog-in-training team may, in the same manner as would an individual who is not a member of any of those teams, enter and use any place, accommodation, building or conveyance to which the public is invited or has access, provided that the individual who is a member of the team ensures the dog that is a member of the team (a) does not occupy a seat in a public conveyance or a place where food is served or dispensed to the public, as the case may be, and (b) is held by a leash or harness. (2) A person must not (a) interfere with the exercise of the right of entry and use specified in subsection (1), or (b) charge a fee, in respect of the exercise of the right of entry and use specified in subsection (1), for the dog …”

S.B.C. 2015, c. 17, s. 2

• Certification is through the provincial registrar (ss. 5–6), with deemed certification for graduates of accredited or recognised training schools (s. 6.1).
• Dogs in training are covered when working with a certified trainer.
• Tenancy is protected (s. 3) and false representation is an offence (s. 4).
• “Nothing in this Act … abrogates or derogates from the Human Rights Code” (s. 1.1) — an uncertified team still has a discrimination claim.

Ontario’s customer-service standard under the AODA sets out, in one subsection, the two ways an animal qualifies — and the second of them is a documentation route that a provider may rely on.

“(4) For the purposes of this Part, an animal is a service animal for a person with a disability if, (a) the animal can be readily identified as one that is being used by the person for reasons relating to the person’s disability, as a result of visual indicators such as the vest or harness worn by the animal; or (b) the person provides documentation from one of the following regulated health professionals confirming that the person requires the animal for reasons relating to the disability …”

O. Reg. 191/11, s. 80.45(4)

“80.47 (2) If a person with a disability is accompanied by a guide dog or other service animal, the provider shall ensure that the person is permitted to enter the premises with the animal and to keep the animal with him or her, unless the animal is otherwise excluded by law from the premises. (3) If a service animal is excluded by law from the premises, the provider shall ensure that other measures are available to enable a person with a disability to obtain, use or benefit from the provider’s goods, services or facilities.”

O. Reg. 191/11, s. 80.47(2)–(3)

The Human Rights Code names the dog

“‘disability’ means, (a) any degree of physical disability … or physical reliance on a guide dog or other animal or on a wheelchair or other remedial appliance or device …”

“45.2 (1) On an application under section 34, the Tribunal may make one or more of the following orders … 1. An order directing the party who infringed the right to pay monetary compensation to the party whose right was infringed for loss arising out of the infringement, including compensation for injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect. 2. An order … to make restitution … 3. An order directing any party to the application to do anything that, in the opinion of the Tribunal, the party ought to do to promote compliance with this Act.”

Human Rights Code, RSO 1990 c. H.19, ss. 10(1), 45.2(1) — no statutory ceiling on compensation

Guide dogs: the older, stricter statute

“No person, directly or indirectly … shall, (a) deny to any person the accommodation, services or facilities available in any place to which the public is customarily admitted; or (b) discriminate against any person with respect to the accommodation, services or facilities available in any place to which the public is customarily admitted, or the charges for the use thereof, for the reason that he or she is a blind person accompanied by a guide dog.” … “6. (1) Every person who is in contravention of section 2 is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine not exceeding $5,000.”

Blind Persons’ Rights Act, RSO 1990 c. B.7, ss. 2(1), 6(1); the Act applies “despite any other Act” (s. 1(2))

• A vest or harness does legal work in Ontario. It is one of the two statutory routes to recognition. In the US it does none.
• The letter route lists specific regulated colleges — physicians, psychologists, nurses, and others named in the subsection. A PTSD service dog handler should have one on file.
• AODA non-compliance is an offence in its own right — up to $50,000 a day for a person and $100,000 a day for a corporation (s. 37(3)) — separate from the Tribunal’s compensation order.
• Exclusion “by law” is narrow and triggers a duty to provide another way to get the service.

Alberta’s Act covers persons with “any degree of disability except blindness or visual impairment” who depend on a service dog (guide dogs fall under the separate Blind Persons’ Rights Act). It prohibits discriminatory practices against a qualified team (s. 3), provides a provincial identification card (s. 4), and makes contravention an offence.

“6(1) A person who contravenes section 3 is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding $3000. (2) A person who contravenes section 4(3) or who, not being a disabled person, purports to be a disabled person for the purpose of claiming the benefit of this Act is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding $300.”

Service Dogs Act, s. 6

• Québec protects handlers through section 10 of the Charter, which names handicap and “the use of any means to palliate a handicap” as prohibited grounds; section 49 gives a right to compensation and to punitive damages for intentional interference. Complaints to the Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse.
• Manitoba has a dedicated statute protecting service animals from interference and harm, alongside the Human Rights Code.
• Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador each have a service-dog or service-animal Act with its own recognition scheme and access right.
• Every other province and territory protects handlers through its human-rights code: accommodation to the point of undue hardship, enforced by a provincial tribunal.

The CFIA sets the entry rules for dogs, and service dogs are assessed under the personal-import category with a valid rabies vaccination certificate as the baseline. Requirements differ by the dog’s country of origin and age, and change; confirm them with the CFIA before travel, and separately confirm the US re-entry rules for the return.