Decision No. 9-AT-A-2025

Summary

[1] Cynthia-Jean Smith filed an application with the Canadian Transportation Agency (Agency) against WestJet regarding the difficulties she faced in getting her dog accepted for travel as a service dog.

[2] Ms. Smith seeks the following:

• an order requiring WestJet to accept her dog as a service dog for travel;
• compensation for pain and suffering in the amount of CAD 10,000; and
• an unspecified amount of compensation for wilful or reckless practice.

[3] In Decision LET-AT-A-59-2024 (Decision), issued on December 10, 2024, the Agency directed Ms. Smith to provide more information about her medical condition(s) and the training of her dog.

[4] For the reasons set out below, the Agency dismisses the application.

Background

[5] Ms. Smith purchased a ticket to travel from Edmonton, Alberta, to Toronto, Ontario, via Vancouver, British Columbia, departing on August 2, 2024, and returning on August 8, 2024. She submits that she is deaf and has post-traumatic stress disorder, autism spectrum disorder and chronic knee pain.

[6] Ms. Smith, with the help of family members, contacted WestJet on July 11 and 12, 2024, to add her dog to the reservation as a service dog. WestJet informed Ms. Smith that her dog, a Great Dane Mastiff weighing around 115 pounds, could not be added to the reservation because of his size. Ms. Smith states that a third person called WestJet for her and at that point her dog was allowed to travel with her.

Dismissal of the application

[7] The Accessible Transportation for Persons with Disabilities Regulations (ATPDR) state that a carrier must accept a service dog for transport and permit the animal to accompany the person on board. To meet the definition of a service dog under the ATPDR, a dog must be 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. Accordingly, in order to find that a dog is a service dog under the ATPDR, the Agency requires evidence from the applicant to establish four elements:

• they are a person with a disability;
• they have a disability-related need that is met by a service dog;
• their dog has been individually trained to perform a task to assist them with a disability-related need; and
• this training has been completed by an organization or person specializing in service dog training.

[8] Ms. Smith’s application did not contain the evidence required to establish these elements. The Agency’s Secretariat sought more information from Ms. Smith on two occasions and ultimately the Agency issued the Decision, specifically requiring Ms. Smith to provide:

• a Medical Information Form (MIF) completed by a physician or medical health professional to establish the first two elements; and
• documentation from her dog trainer to establish the third and fourth elements.

[9] In the Decision, Ms. Smith was explicitly advised of a previous case that provided guidance on evidence required to establish that the dog was a service dog. The evidence included that an attestation from the dog trainer had to contain:

• a clear description of the task(s) the dog has been individually trained to perform to assist with disability-related need(s);
• the credentials of the trainer(s), including any qualifications, certifications and affiliations with professional service dog organizations such as the Canadian Association of Service Dog Trainers and the Canadian Association of Guide and Assistance Dog Schools; and
• a clear description of the specific content of the training program(s) completed by the dog, including the duration of the program, the goals to be achieved by the dog, the involvement of the dog user, the assessment methods and the assessment results achieved by the dog and its user.

[10] The MIF completed by her physician established that Ms. Smith has a number of conditions that could constitute disabilities for the purposes of the Canada Transportation Act (CTA). The completed MIF states that Ms. Smith requires a “therapy dog” to meet a variety of her disability-related needs. The Agency is prepared to accept that the tasks related to her severe hearing impairment, hearing assistance and alerting, constitute tasks for purposes of categorizing her dog as a service dog under the ATPDR.

[11] However, Ms. Smith has failed to establish that the training organization and the trainer involved in her dog’s training have the necessary specialization in service dog training that is required under the ATPDR. While Ms. Smith did submit letters from the training organization and the trainer, these provided no evidence of credentials, such as any qualifications, certifications and affiliations with any professional service dog organizations, as required by the ATPDR and as directed in the Decision.

[12] Therefore, the Agency finds that Ms. Smith’s dog does not qualify as a service dog as the evidence fails to demonstrate that the dog has been trained by an organization or person specializing in service dog training, as required to meet the definition of service dog under the ATPDR.

[13] In addition, the Agency notes that Ms. Smith’s evidence from the trainer also failed to provide:

• a clear description of the tasks that the dog was individually trained to perform; and
• a clear description of the specific content of the training program(s) completed by the dog.

[14] While the trainer indicates that Ms. Smith’s dog has been individually trained “to behave appropriately in public settings without aggression toward humans or other animals” and perform various tasks to assist Ms. Smith with her disabilities and that Ms. Smith works with her dog two hours per day “with on-going training and support” to achieve success, these descriptions lack the detail necessary to make a prima facie case that the dog received appropriate service dog training.

Conclusion

[15] The Agency dismisses the application.

Legislation or Tariff referenced	Numeric identifier (section, subsection, rule, etc.)
Canada Transportation Act, SC 1996, c 10	169.5; 172(1)
Accessible Transportation for Persons with Disabilities Regulations, SOR/2019-244	51(1); 51(2)