2

Suppose that the manager uses as an argument something as vague as "I didn't like what you did here last week" and does not cite any law nor policy.

2

Absolutely. The person having control other the establishment can disallow you to enter unless the reason is illegal discrimination. They don’t need to cite any law, “I don’t want you in here” is enough reason. No explanation needed why and if they give an explanation, “I don’t like your face” is enough.

8
  • Do you have any source to support your answer? – Seno Jun 16 '20 at 21:23
  • 1
    @Seno the specific statute depends on the province, but they're mostly similar everywhere - here's Ontario Trespass to Property Act ontario.ca/laws/statute/90t21 - you are on private property, and if you " does not leave the premises immediately after he or she is directed to do so by the occupier of the premises or a person authorized by the occupier," then you would be guilty of trespass. – Peteris Jun 16 '20 at 21:37
  • @Peteris, so you are stating that a supermarket would be bound to the same law as a house? – Seno Jun 16 '20 at 21:59
  • 1
    @Seno yes, almost. From the perspective of property rights there's no difference between the building you sleep in and the building where you work, in both cases you have the right to determine who is allowed to enter and who is not. The main difference is in the implied permission, i.e. a shop or medical clinic with open doors during its normal working hours is not prohibiting entry to anyone - but as soon as the responsible manager gives you notice that you're not welcome there, you are prohibited from staying in the exact same manner as they would be prohibited to stay in your bedroom. – Peteris Jun 16 '20 at 22:10
  • 1
    @Seno going on with the medical clinic example - in a medical clinic, a door with a red sign "AUTHORIZED PERSONELL ONLY" is one way how the owner or their representative could legally prohibit entry to everyone who's not explicitly authorized, and an oral notice personally to you "you're forbidden to enter" is an equivalent prohibition that explicitly applies to you; in both cases the violator would be guilty of the offence of trespass. Of course, specific laws may also apply in various conditions - e.g. non-discrimination for shops, medical clinics can plausibly also have extra rules. – Peteris Jun 16 '20 at 22:19

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.