Allergies are one of the most frequently cited reasons businesses give for refusing a service dog in Canada. While allergies can be serious, they do not automatically justify denying access to a service dog under Canadian human rights law.
Canadian accessibility frameworks are built on the principle of reasonable accommodation. When two protected needs conflict, such as a disability requiring a service dog and a severe allergy, businesses are expected to balance both interests rather than exclude one party outright.
In practice, this often means adjusting seating arrangements, increasing physical distance, improving ventilation, or scheduling accommodations differently. Blanket refusals are rarely appropriate without evidence that no reasonable accommodation is possible.
Undue hardship is the legal threshold that allows a business to limit accommodation. This is a high standard and requires objective evidence, not assumptions or discomfort. Mild or moderate allergies typically do not meet this threshold.
Businesses should avoid making on-the-spot decisions based solely on complaints from other patrons. Instead, they should focus on practical solutions that respect both parties.
Key takeaways:
• Allergies do not automatically override service dog access
• Businesses must attempt reasonable accommodation
• Undue hardship requires strong evidence
• Exclusion is a last resort
For examples of allergy-related accommodation scenarios, see the Canadian Service Dogs Handbook.