, The court decided against the applicant and cited the following ratio decidendi (reasoning): Accommodating the applicants would have created hardship in the form of relived trauma for rape victims

Question 1 (1 point) In XY v. Ontario (Government and Consumer Services), The court decided against the applicant and cited the following ratio decidendi (reasoning): Accommodating the applicants would have created hardship in the form of relived trauma for rape victims Accommodating the applicant would have created hardship for the centre for young offenders O The applicant did not show bona fide ( genuine) belief that she needs the professional training The applicant abandoned the application before the final hearing and was warned by the court that abandoning the the case would result in losing the case Question 2 (1 point) Which of these Human Rights cases was decided by the Supreme Court of Canada? Didier v. Toronto Community Housing Corporation OXY v. Ontario (Government and Consumer Services) Siadat v. Ontario College of Teachers Multaniv, Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys Question 3 (1 point) The duty to accommodate is absolute, meaning that it always applies even it the cost of accommodation exceeds the benefit of doing business. True False