Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 2, 2013

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to file directed submissions.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment.

The Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction requiring submissions on whether the application should be dismissed under section 34(11) of the Human Rights Code.

The applicant failed to file submissions by the deadline.

Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Karen Anstey v. Roswit (1989) Corporation aka Sorbara, Schumacher, McCann LLP, 2013 HRTO 740

Paul Rochford

In Private Practice4 cases2012–2013

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 22, 2013

Human rights application dismissed as an abuse of process due to applicant's abusive and threatening conduct.

The respondents requested that the human rights application be dismissed as an abuse of process due to the applicant's persistent use of abusive, insulting, and threatening language towards the respondents, their counsel, and the Tribunal.

The applicant argued his language was justified by the respondents' alleged actions and his medical conditions, including post-traumatic stress disorder.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's conduct, which included veiled threats of physical violence, constituted an abuse of process that could not be excused as an accommodation for his disability.

The application was dismissed, and the Tribunal deferred its decision on whether to declare the applicant a vexatious litigant pending further submissions.

Vizcaya v. UJA Federation of Greater Toronto, 2013 HRTO 666

Pre-2005 discrimination allegations dismissed as out of time; post-2005 allegations proceed and amendments allowed.

The applicant, a police officer, filed a human rights application alleging sex discrimination dating back to 2002, including allegations related to maternity leaves taken after 2005.

The respondent requested dismissal of the pre-2005 allegations as out of time, and dismissal of other allegations on the basis that they were appropriately dealt with in grievance proceedings.

The Tribunal found that the pre-2005 allegations were not part of a series of incidents with the post-2005 allegations and dismissed them as out of time.

The Tribunal declined to dismiss the application under section 45.1, finding the grievances did not appropriately deal with the substance of the application.

The Tribunal also granted the applicant's request to amend the application to include recent allegations of discrimination and reprisal.

Sjaarda v. Ottawa Police Services Board, 2013 HRTO 599

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMar 28, 2013

Request for reconsideration of age discrimination decision dismissed as it amounted to re-argument.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his application alleging age discrimination in a hiring process.

The applicant argued that the adjudicator erred in assessing the credibility of the respondent's witness regarding when he would be contacted after a job interview.

The Tribunal dismissed the request for reconsideration, finding that the applicant's submissions amounted to a re-argument of issues already addressed in the original decision and did not meet the criteria for reconsideration under the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

Meredith v. MGC Limited Partnership, 2013 HRTO 532

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMar 25, 2013

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Tribunal directions.

The applicant filed a human rights application but subsequently failed to respond to two Case Assessment Directions requiring him to confirm his intention to participate in the scheduled hearing.

Noting that there was no indication the directions were not received and no communication from the applicant, the Tribunal concluded the application had been abandoned and dismissed it.

Gary Chatsick v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario, as represented by the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services, 2013 HRTO 496

Lucy Siraco

35 cases2000–2016

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMar 22, 2013

Reconsideration request denied as applicant merely attempted to re-argue matters already decided.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a decision that dismissed her human rights application following a summary hearing.

The original decision found that some allegations were out of time and the remaining allegations had no reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal denied the reconsideration request, finding that the applicant was attempting to re-argue matters already decided and had not established any of the grounds required under Rule 26 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

Borba v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2013 HRTO 427

Evan Van Dyk

Practising Law - Employed8 cases2010–2013

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMar 19, 2013

Request for reconsideration of decision dismissing failure to accommodate claim denied.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed her application alleging failure to accommodate her scent and fragrance sensitivity.

The applicant argued there were factual errors, credibility issues, and that she was denied a fair hearing due to time constraints.

The Tribunal found that the applicant was attempting to re-argue her case and had not presented new evidence that was unavailable at the hearing.

The request for reconsideration was denied as the applicant failed to meet the criteria under Rule 26.

Kovios v. Inteleservices Canada Inc., 2013 HRTO 460

Tom Moutsatsos

Not Practising Law - Employed12 cases2001–2018

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed because the applicant signed a binding release upon termination.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability.

Upon termination of her employment, the applicant had signed a Full and Final Release in exchange for a severance package, which explicitly barred her from bringing a claim under the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal held a preliminary hearing to determine if the application could proceed.

The Tribunal found that the applicant was given sufficient time to review the documents and did not sign them under duress.

The release was held to be binding, and the application was dismissed.

Darlene Ford v. Lafarge Canada Inc., 2013 HRTO 432

Brian Cook

Tribunal orders applicant to provide information regarding her litigation guardian before proceeding with human rights application.

The applicant, acting as trustee for the Estate of Eva Bourgoin, filed a human rights application alleging discrimination based on disability.

The respondents requested dismissal based on a Release signed by the applicant.

The applicant argued the Release might be invalid because a litigation guardian had been appointed for her by a court order prior to signing.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision requiring the applicant to provide information confirming her litigation guardian's involvement or that a litigation guardian is no longer required before the application can proceed.

Bourgoin Estate v. Maple Villa Long Term Care Centre, 2013 HRTO 429

Michelle Alton

14 cases2010–2014

Jorge Hurtado

36 cases2009–2026

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 22, 2013

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to attend scheduled hearing.

The applicant failed to attend a scheduled hearing to clarify allegations and discuss a timetable.

The Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant received notice of the hearing and the potential consequences of failing to attend.

As a result, the application was dismissed as abandoned.

Estelita Vivas v. Metropolitan Hotels and Isabel Carreiro, 2013 HRTO 307

Paula Rusak

Licence Surrendered - Retired31 cases1986–2017

Katrina Peddle

Not Practising Law5 cases2013–2017

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 12, 2013

Human rights application dismissed for delay, prior settlement, and having been addressed in another proceeding.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment by her former employer and union following a workplace injury.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application should be dismissed for delay and lack of reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal dismissed the application against the employer because it was filed more than one year after the last incident without a good faith explanation for the delay, and was barred by Minutes of Settlement.

The application against the union was dismissed because the Ontario Labour Relations Board had already dealt with the substance of the allegations and there was no reasonable prospect of proving the union's actions were discriminatory.

Landry v. Scapa Tapes North America, 2013 HRTO 253

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Notice of Intent to Dismiss.

The applicant filed an application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code against the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss the application on the basis that it appeared to be outside its jurisdiction.

The applicant failed to respond to the Notice by the specified deadline.

Consequently, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Achille Ruffolo v. Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, 2013 HRTO 247

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Notice of Intent to Dismiss.

The applicant filed an application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code against the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss the application as it appeared to be outside its jurisdiction.

The applicant failed to respond to the Notice by the specified deadline.

Consequently, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Achille Ruffolo v. Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, 2013 HRTO 245

Brian Cook

Reconsideration request denied as applicant failed to establish any grounds under Rule 26.5.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his human rights application because he had signed a release in favour of the respondent employer.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the applicant merely restated his original allegations and failed to establish any of the required grounds for reconsideration under Rule 26.5, such as new evidence or a conflict with established jurisprudence.

Amendola v. Marriott Hotels of Canada Ltd., 2013 HRTO 241

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 29, 2013

Reconsideration denied where applicant failed to explain delay or meet grounds under Rule 26.5.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a 2011 decision that dismissed her human rights application as abandoned after she failed to attend a summary hearing.

The applicant filed the request for reconsideration nine months after the decision was released, citing feeling overwhelmed and a change of address, but admitted to checking her emails regularly.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the applicant failed to establish any of the grounds for reconsideration under Rule 26.5 and failed to explain why the request was not filed within the required 30-day period.

Holly Banda v. Alanna Miller, Corrine Long, and Frank Smith, 2013 HRTO 161

Jesse Nyman

Not Practising Law - Employed2 cases2012–2013

Brian Cook

Human rights application regarding disability benefits administration dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination on the basis of disability regarding the administration of his short-term disability, long-term disability, and health and welfare benefits.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application should be dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success or for being filed outside the one-year limitation period.

The Tribunal found no reasonable prospect that the applicant could show the respondent benefit administrator discriminated against him, as it merely administered the plans and did not make the decisions to deny benefits or design the coverage.

The allegations regarding communication were dismissed for delay.

The application was dismissed.

William Brown v. Manion, Wilkins & Associates Ltd., 2013 HRTO 137

Peikang Dai

1 case2013–2013

Brian Cook

In Private Practice8 cases2012–2022

Reconsideration request denied as applicant failed to provide valid grounds under Rule 26.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a previous Tribunal decision that dismissed his application as an abuse of process and declared him a vexatious litigant.

The applicant argued there were new facts and errors in the decision, including a dispute over the number of pages in his email attachments.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide any basis under Rule 26 to reconsider the decision, noting that the request was an attempt to reargue issues already decided.

The request for reconsideration was denied.

Dai v. Presbyterian Church in Canada, 2013 HRTO 134

Randy Ai

Ellen Low

3 cases2012–2016

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 22, 2013

Motion to remove counsel dismissed as adequate screening measures were implemented when lawyer changed firms.

The applicant brought a motion to remove the respondents' counsel due to an alleged conflict of interest.

The conflict arose when a lawyer who had previously worked on the applicant's file at her counsel's firm moved to the firm representing the respondents.

Applying the test from MacDonald Estate, the Tribunal found that while the lawyer likely received confidential information, the respondents' new firm had implemented adequate and timely screening measures to prevent disclosure.

The motion to remove counsel was dismissed.

Lukasik v. 611554 Ontario Inc. o/a Palm’s Court Restaurant, 2013 HRTO 115

Mark Rowlinson

In Private Practice21 cases1995–2013

Lori Mishibinijima

12 cases2010–2017

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 16, 2013

Union granted intervener status in member's human rights application regarding a non-bargaining unit position.

The applicant alleged discrimination when she was not awarded a non-bargaining unit position, which was instead given to a bargaining unit member.

The applicant's union, the United Steelworkers, filed a request to intervene.

The applicant opposed the request, citing confidentiality concerns and arguing the union had no authority over the non-bargaining unit position.

The Tribunal granted the union's request to intervene, finding that the union could be affected if the applicant was placed in the position, as it would displace the current bargaining unit member.

The Tribunal also directed the parties to make submissions on whether the successful candidate should be given notice of the application.

Freda Schugmann v. The Corporation of the Municipality of Red Lake, 2013 HRTO 84

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 3, 2013

Human rights application deferred pending resolution of related Employment Standards Act claim.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability and reprisal for filing a WSIB claim.

Prior to this, the applicant had filed a claim under the Employment Standards Act (ESA) regarding termination pay and unpaid wages.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer the application pending the ESA claim.

The applicant opposed deferral, while the respondent supported it.

The Tribunal found substantial overlap between the facts and issues in both proceedings and ordered the human rights application deferred pending the resolution of the ESA claim.

Ryan Carrier v. Saunders Plumbing & Heating Inc., 2013 HRTO 10

Applicant

Mary FerrariSelf-represented
2 appearances
David VizcayaSelf-represented
2 appearances
Angela PapanicolopoulouSelf-represented
1 appearance
Mario BanaagSelf-represented
1 appearance
Hina LiaqatSelf-represented
1 appearance
Michael NgSelf-represented
1 appearance
Shihab TahaSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kenneth MuiSelf-represented
1 appearance
Lilie YingSelf-represented
1 appearance
Michele Van BauwelSelf-represented
1 appearance
Anna DeaneSelf-represented
1 appearance
Donna CameronSelf-represented
1 appearance
Robert SmithSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kevin CavanaghSelf-represented
1 appearance
Eugenia MoralesSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kyle BordenSelf-represented
1 appearance
Sherifat OgunyeSelf-represented
1 appearance
David CurtisSelf-represented
1 appearance
John McLeodSelf-represented
1 appearance
Carlton GerrickSelf-represented
1 appearance

counsel

Justin McLartyCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel

Anthony SpadaforaCounsel
1 appearance
Nasrudin MuminCounsel
1 appearance
Helen DanielCounsel
1 appearance
Victor YeeCounsel
1 appearance
Paul RochfordCounsel
1 appearance
Lori MishibinijimaCounsel
1 appearance
Blair McCreadieCounsel
1 appearance
Kimberly MorrisCounsel
1 appearance
Naomi LoewithCounsel
1 appearance
Natalia PolisCounsel
1 appearance
Sari SpringerCounsel
1 appearance
Malcolm MacKillopCounsel
1 appearance
Ira GreenspoonCounsel
1 appearance
Bharat KapoorCounsel
1 appearance
George VuicicCounsel
1 appearance
David DanielsonCounsel
1 appearance
Dianne JozefackiCounsel
1 appearance
Mark RowlinsonCounsel
1 appearance
Michelle KellyCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for Human Resources Professional Association and Rebecca Durcan

Erica RichlerCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for Loblaw Companies Limited

McLean WoodCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for Ontario College of Nurses, Proposed Respondent

Prya MorleyCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for Ontario Lottery and Gaming Commission

David RossCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Respondents

Paul RochfordCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the respondent United Steelworkers, Local 7135

Cathy BakerCounsel
1 appearance

for Alana Miller

Mark EllisCounsel
1 appearance

for AuRico Gold Inc.

Michael TorranceCounsel
1 appearance

for Carillion Services Inc.

Daniel ShieldsCounsel
1 appearance

for Caroline Roncadin

Amanda SmallwoodCounsel
1 appearance

for CAW

Anthony DaleCounsel
1 appearance

for Chrysler Canada

Clifford HartCounsel
1 appearance

for Complex Services Inc.

Paul PingueCounsel
1 appearance

for Contact Niagara for Children’s and Developmental Services and Todd Mason

Lonny RosenCounsel
2 appearances

for Corrine Long

Raj AnandCounsel
1 appearance

for CUPE

Ryan GoldvineUnion representative
1 appearance
Susan BallantyneCounsel
1 appearance

for CUPE, Interested party

Fred HoUnion representative
1 appearance

for CUPE Local 3166 and CUPE Local 5200

Elizabeth NurseCounsel
1 appearance

for Deborah DeGroot

Deborah DeGrootSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Delta Bingo Inc.

Sabatina VassalliCounsel
1 appearance

for Dufferin Vacant Land Condominium Corporation No. 22

Michelle KellyCounsel
1 appearance

for F Janzen Drug Limited

Derek ZulianelloCounsel
1 appearance

for Frank Smith

Anna MatasCounsel
1 appearance

for Gomez Sebastian and Tobias Abell

Mahi KeyvaniAgent
1 appearance

for Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario

Anita LyonCounsel
1 appearance

for Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as Represented by the Minister of Education

Daniel HuffakerCounsel
1 appearance

for Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Government Services

Stuart McMahonCounsel
1 appearance

for Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as Represented by the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities

Bruce EllisCounsel
1 appearance

for herself

Elizabeth LewisSelf-represented
1 appearance
Chantelle SulaimanSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kirenia LindsaySelf-represented
1 appearance
Miranda PavelicSelf-represented
1 appearance

for himself

Tom SteersSelf-represented
1 appearance
David LawsonSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Honywell Safety Products

Sven PoysaCounsel
1 appearance

for Kinark Child and Family Services

Sabatina VassalliCounsel
2 appearances

for Laird Constructors

Scott ThompsonCounsel
1 appearance

for Loblaw Companies Limited and MacLean Wood

MacLean WoodCounsel
1 appearance

for Mahdi Keyvani

Mahdi KeyvaniSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Margaret De Wit

Self-representedSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Marty Burke

Marty BurkeSelf-represented
1 appearance

former representative for the Applicant

Leonard ReeceAgent
1 appearance

for Niagara Hospitality Hotels Inc.

Self-representedSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Norfolk County, Norview Lodge, Kim Jenereaux, and Cindy Arn

Ryan ConlinCounsel
1 appearance

for Ontario Charitable Gaming Association

Michael LiptonCounsel
1 appearance

for Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation

M. David RossCounsel
1 appearance
Tom MoutsatsosCounsel
1 appearance

for Ontario Public Service Employees Union

Hugh O’ReillyCounsel
1 appearance

for OPSEU

David WrightCounsel
1 appearance

for OPSEU Pension Trust

Ari KaplanCounsel
1 appearance

for Petro Canada

Susan MetzlerCounsel
1 appearance

for Regional Municipality of Waterloo, Helen Eby, Diana Ulett, Jacqueline Williams, Canday Wilts, Jean Shearer, Leanne Brooker, Kasia Znaniecki, and Patricia Wagler

Carl PetersonCounsel
1 appearance
Megan BealCounsel
1 appearance

for Scapa Tapes North America

Paula RusakCounsel
1 appearance

for Scapa Tapes North America and United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial Local 6946-I

Katrina PeddleCounsel
1 appearance

for SEIU, Local 1 Canada

Karen WalshUnion representative
1 appearance

for Sheraton Gateway Hotel and Andrew Simmers

Donna D’AndreaCounsel
1 appearance

for Stevens Resource Group Inc.

Elizabeth TraynorCounsel
1 appearance

for St. John's

Lena VartanianCounsel
1 appearance

for the applicant

Glen MorrisonParalegal
1 appearance
Brenda CulbertAgent
1 appearance

for the Applicant

Christine LundyParalegal
6 appearances
John BartolomeoCounsel
5 appearances
Osborne BarnwellCounsel
4 appearances
Andrew SpragueSelf-represented
4 appearances
Glen MorrisonAgent
4 appearances
Shawn WestonParalegal
4 appearances
Beth WaldenCounsel
4 appearances
David VizcayaSelf-represented
3 appearances
Andrew PintoCounsel
3 appearances
Audrey VassellSelf-represented
3 appearances
Duane MyersSelf-represented
3 appearances
Victor YeeCounsel
3 appearances
George CarterSelf-represented
3 appearances
Donald CampbellSelf-represented
3 appearances
Alan BoswellSelf-represented
2 appearances
Irby ShepherdSelf-represented
2 appearances
Self-representedSelf-represented
2 appearances
Michael MooreSelf-represented
2 appearances
Ella VenholaCounsel
2 appearances
Daniel ParsonsSelf-represented
2 appearances

for the Applicants

Self-representedSelf-represented
1 appearance
Michelle BoyceSelf-represented
1 appearance
Roger MooreSelf-represented
1 appearance
Randy WeaverSelf-represented
1 appearance
Timothy WhiteSelf-represented
1 appearance
Laura WhiteSelf-represented
1 appearance
Brenda CulbertCounsel
1 appearance
Berhane TsehayeSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Canadian Addiction Treatment Centres LP

Peter DudaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Canadian Commercial Workers Industry Pension Plan

Anthony GuindonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 4807

David SteeleCounsel
1 appearance

for the College of Ontario Surgeons of Ontario

Monica TessierCounsel
1 appearance

for the Financial Services Commission of Ontario

Shemin ManjiCounsel
1 appearance

for the Halton Catholic District School Board

Brenda BowlbyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervener

Frank ReynoldsUnion representative
1 appearance

for the Intervenor

Stephanie HobbsCounsel
2 appearances
Paul O’RyanCounsel
2 appearances
Jessica HoffmanCounsel
1 appearance
David WrightCounsel
1 appearance
Brian AshtonCounsel
1 appearance
Gordon HumSelf-represented
1 appearance
Graham MartetteUnion representative
1 appearance
Michele Hamilton MayersCounsel
1 appearance
Jenifer JoplingCounsel
1 appearance
Catherine DavisCounsel
1 appearance
Shaheen HiraniCounsel
1 appearance
Aaron NeavesUnion representative
1 appearance
Katherine RowenCounsel
1 appearance
Heather Ann McConnellCounsel
1 appearance
Risa PancerCounsel
1 appearance
Piper HendersonCounsel
1 appearance
Ken DamUnion representative
1 appearance
Robert ChampagneCounsel
1 appearance
Jorge HurtadoCounsel
1 appearance
Mary Catherine ChambersCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor York Regional Police Association

Bruce PriceCounsel
1 appearance

for The Law Foundation, Marion Boyd, and Chris Thomas

Elizabeth ForsterCounsel
1 appearance

for The Law Society of Upper Canada and Thomas Conway

Dolores BarbiniCounsel
1 appearance

for the Male Faculty Member

Ross WellsCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ministry of Children and Youth Services

Cheryl EllisonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services

Stewart McMahonCounsel
1 appearance

for the numbered company

Jeffery KerbelAgent
1 appearance

for the Office of the Independent Police Review Director, Respondent

Lynette D’SouzaCounsel
1 appearance

for the organizational respondent and the other personal respondents

Douglas AbrahamCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed intervenor

Melissa KronickCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed Personal Respondent

Simon-Pierre PaquetteCounsel
1 appearance

for the proposed respondent

Heather AldenUnion representative
1 appearance

for the Proposed Respondent

Kylie Crawford Ten BrookCounsel
1 appearance
Daryl CukiermanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent

Greg BullenCounsel
5 appearances
Erica CappelloCounsel
3 appearances
Christopher RiggsCounsel
3 appearances
Andrew BrattCounsel
3 appearances
Colin YoungmanCounsel
3 appearances
David PatacairkCounsel
2 appearances
Kate DeardenCounsel
2 appearances
Mathieu DuceppeCounsel
2 appearances
Roy FilionCounsel
2 appearances
Seann McAleeseCounsel
2 appearances
Frank AngelettiCounsel
2 appearances
Samantha CrumbCounsel
2 appearances
Marnie CorboldCounsel
2 appearances
Jessica YoungCounsel
2 appearances
Evan VanDykCounsel
2 appearances
Daniel ChodosCounsel
2 appearances
Michael HorvatCounsel
2 appearances
Antonella CeddiaCounsel
2 appearances
Indira SawhCounsel
2 appearances
David WhittenCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent 1243564 Ontario Limited

Kathleen AndrewCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent 1243564 Ontario Limited o/a Total Scrap Management

Kathleen AndrewCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Canadian Union of Public Employees and its Local 87

Gavin LeebCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent CAW

Anthony DaleCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Chrysler Canada

Clifford HartCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Chrysler Canada Inc.

Cliff HartCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent City of Hamilton

Brenda GloverCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent, Clint Williams

Thomas SargeantAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Francisco José De Andrade

Francisco José De AndradeSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent Hamilton Niagara Haldimand Brant Community Care Access Centre

Katharine ByrickCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Hamilton Police Association

Joshua PhillipsCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Hamilton Police Services Board

Marco VisentiniCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Henry Rivas

Crista ReaCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Attorney General

Fatema DadaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Hotel Dieu Grace Hospital

Kate DeardenCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Howard Hurwitz

Amanda SmallwoodCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Mary Powell

Susan TothCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Maxine Straker

Maxine StrakerSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent Michael Rogozinsky

Michael RogozinskySelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent ParaMed Home Health Care

Shikha SharmaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Pomer and Boccia Professional Corporation

David PomerCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent, Prescott Standard Condominium Corporation No. 19

Mitchell RobinsonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Rogers Blue Jays Baseball Partnership dba Toronto Blue Jays Baseball Club

Arlen SternbergCounsel
1 appearance

for the respondents

Mr. LaplanteCounsel
1 appearance
Catherine PetersCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents

Susan MunnCounsel
4 appearances
Erin PorterCounsel
3 appearances
Patty MurrayCounsel
3 appearances
Nancy Jammu-TaylorCounsel
2 appearances
Mathew MihailovichCounsel
2 appearances
Catherine PetersCounsel
2 appearances
Ellen LowCounsel
2 appearances
David GourlayCounsel
2 appearances
Kristin TaylorCounsel
2 appearances
Robert StewartAgent
2 appearances
Michelle AltonCounsel
2 appearances
Jean Leslie MarentetteCounsel
2 appearances
Philip GrahamCounsel
1 appearance
Tom MoutsatsosCounsel
1 appearance
Laura CassianiCounsel
1 appearance
Kate DeardenCounsel
1 appearance
David GoodmanCounsel
1 appearance
Chris EamesCounsel
1 appearance
Tim LawsonCounsel
1 appearance
Junny LoSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondents, 2447127 Ontario Inc.

Thomas SchoenleberParalegal
1 appearance

for the Respondents Karim Zahraei and Roghaiyeh Salmani Farmand

Aysan ZahraeiAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondents Sabeena Misra, L. Atwood, France Fernando, Angela Novena, David Adekoya, Roy Diklich, Curtis Fedoruk and Adewale Akinisotu

Helen RichardsCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Service Employees International Union Canada Local 1, Christine Gilbert and Mike Newell

Mike NewellUnion representative
1 appearance

for the Respondent, Stevens Resource Group

Elizabeth TraynorCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents The Corporation of Norfolk County, Norview Lodge, Kim Jenereaux and Jill Thompson

Ryan ConlinCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents The Regional Municipality of York Police Services Board and Kirk Marshall

Stephen MaioCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The City of Thunder Bay

M. FricotCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Corporation of the City of Thunder Bay

Mandy FricotCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Regional Municipality of Peel Police Services Board

Paula RuzakCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ticketmaster Canada LP

Stuart SvonkinCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Toronto Electric Model Aviation Club

Simon HinchcliffeAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Toronto Police Services Board

Andrea DenovanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1919

Bradley ChaplickCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2471

Jessica HoffmanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Unifor and its Local 1285

Anthony DaleCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent University Health Network – Toronto Western Hospital

Lee LenkinskiCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Windsor Regional Hospital

Paula TrattnerCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent, Workplace Safety and Insurance Board

Gurjit BrarCounsel
1 appearance

for the Service Employees International Union Canada, Local 1

Mike NewellUnion representative
1 appearance

for the Toronto District School Board

Wendy LopezCounsel
1 appearance

for the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board

Agnes WintersingerAgent
1 appearance
Greg BullenCounsel
1 appearance

for Unifor

Piper HendersonCounsel
1 appearance

for Unifor Local 1106, Karrie Mercier and Bill McLachlan

Kathryn BellCounsel
1 appearance

for United Steelworkers

Shaheen HiraniCounsel
1 appearance

for V.H. Fuels Inc.

Eric AmodeoCounsel
1 appearance

for Vince Kerrio

William HayterCounsel
1 appearance

for York University

Joanna RainbowCounsel
1 appearance

On her own behalf

Catherine ChanSelf-represented
1 appearance

On Her Own Behalf

Houdeh HoushangiSelf-represented
1 appearance

on his own behalf

Gilbert McIntyreSelf-represented
1 appearance

On his own behalf

Orlando PrescodSelf-represented
1 appearance
Beata PhilipSelf-represented
1 appearance
Jim HattonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Gansham NarayanSelf-represented
1 appearance

Respondent

Mary WinterSelf-represented
1 appearance
Scott HillAgent
1 appearance
Gordon FitzgeraldCounsel
1 appearance

Respondents

Jinan KubursiCounsel
1 appearance

Self-represented

Brenda DaughertySelf-represented
1 appearance
Candace BurgessSelf-represented
1 appearance
Elizabeth WoodworkSelf-represented
1 appearance
Judith PidgeonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Gary WoodsSelf-represented
1 appearance
Daniel MalloySelf-represented
1 appearance

The Applicant

Peter GeorgakopoulosSelf-represented
1 appearance
Angelo HarrisonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Fraser KegelSelf-represented
1 appearance
Olakemi SobomehinSelf-represented
1 appearance
Cheryl StoneburghSelf-represented
1 appearance
Suzanne CohenSelf-represented
1 appearance

The Intervenor

Victor YeeCounsel
1 appearance

The Respondent

Nasrudin MuminCounsel
1 appearance
Justin McLartyCounsel
1 appearance
Colette DagherAgent
1 appearance
Erik SavasCounsel
1 appearance
Chris MendesAgent
1 appearance
Victor YeeCounsel
1 appearance

Peikang DaiCounsel
1 appearance

757

Decisions

Years active

Tribunals

3.6

cases/mo

HRTO706(93%)

OCAT51(7%)

Decision types

motion

648

trial

109

/Adjudicator

Brian Cook — Member

Human Rights

Employment and Labour Law

Administrative Law

Other Tribunals

Real Estate Law

Workplace Safety and Insurance Law

Workers' Compensation

Landlord and Tenant

Health Law

ADR/Mediation Services

Brian Cook

Member·Condominium Authority Tribunal·Since 2008

OCAT HRTO

757

cases · 19 yrs · HRTO, OCAT

Trial

Motion

Costs

Appeal

Sentencing

Vice-chair· 554Adjudicator· 63Vice-chair· 63Member· 51Vice-Chair· 14Adjudicator· 8Vice-Chair· 1

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 2, 2013

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to file directed submissions.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment.

The Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction requiring submissions on whether the application should be dismissed under section 34(11) of the Human Rights Code.

The applicant failed to file submissions by the deadline.

Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Karen Anstey v. Roswit (1989) Corporation aka Sorbara, Schumacher, McCann LLP, 2013 HRTO 740

Paul Rochford

In Private Practice4 cases2012–2013

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 22, 2013

Human rights application dismissed as an abuse of process due to applicant's abusive and threatening conduct.

The applicant argued his language was justified by the respondents' alleged actions and his medical conditions, including post-traumatic stress disorder.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's conduct, which included veiled threats of physical violence, constituted an abuse of process that could not be excused as an accommodation for his disability.

The application was dismissed, and the Tribunal deferred its decision on whether to declare the applicant a vexatious litigant pending further submissions.

Vizcaya v. UJA Federation of Greater Toronto, 2013 HRTO 666

David Patacairk

Practising Law - Employed51 cases2009–2017

Christine Johnson

In Private Practice22 cases2013–2025

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 11, 2013

Pre-2005 discrimination allegations dismissed as out of time; post-2005 allegations proceed and amendments allowed.

The applicant, a police officer, filed a human rights application alleging sex discrimination dating back to 2002, including allegations related to maternity leaves taken after 2005.

The respondent requested dismissal of the pre-2005 allegations as out of time, and dismissal of other allegations on the basis that they were appropriately dealt with in grievance proceedings.

The Tribunal found that the pre-2005 allegations were not part of a series of incidents with the post-2005 allegations and dismissed them as out of time.

The Tribunal declined to dismiss the application under section 45.1, finding the grievances did not appropriately deal with the substance of the application.

The Tribunal also granted the applicant's request to amend the application to include recent allegations of discrimination and reprisal.

Sjaarda v. Ottawa Police Services Board, 2013 HRTO 599

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMar 28, 2013

Request for reconsideration of age discrimination decision dismissed as it amounted to re-argument.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his application alleging age discrimination in a hiring process.

The applicant argued that the adjudicator erred in assessing the credibility of the respondent's witness regarding when he would be contacted after a job interview.

Meredith v. MGC Limited Partnership, 2013 HRTO 532

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMar 25, 2013

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Tribunal directions.

The applicant filed a human rights application but subsequently failed to respond to two Case Assessment Directions requiring him to confirm his intention to participate in the scheduled hearing.

Noting that there was no indication the directions were not received and no communication from the applicant, the Tribunal concluded the application had been abandoned and dismissed it.

Gary Chatsick v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario, as represented by the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services, 2013 HRTO 496

Lucy Siraco

35 cases2000–2016

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMar 22, 2013

Reconsideration request denied as applicant merely attempted to re-argue matters already decided.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a decision that dismissed her human rights application following a summary hearing.

The original decision found that some allegations were out of time and the remaining allegations had no reasonable prospect of success.

Borba v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2013 HRTO 427

Evan Van Dyk

Practising Law - Employed8 cases2010–2013

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMar 19, 2013

Request for reconsideration of decision dismissing failure to accommodate claim denied.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed her application alleging failure to accommodate her scent and fragrance sensitivity.

The applicant argued there were factual errors, credibility issues, and that she was denied a fair hearing due to time constraints.

The Tribunal found that the applicant was attempting to re-argue her case and had not presented new evidence that was unavailable at the hearing.

The request for reconsideration was denied as the applicant failed to meet the criteria under Rule 26.

Kovios v. Inteleservices Canada Inc., 2013 HRTO 460

Tom Moutsatsos

Not Practising Law - Employed12 cases2001–2018

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed because the applicant signed a binding release upon termination.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability.

The Tribunal held a preliminary hearing to determine if the application could proceed.

The Tribunal found that the applicant was given sufficient time to review the documents and did not sign them under duress.

The release was held to be binding, and the application was dismissed.

Darlene Ford v. Lafarge Canada Inc., 2013 HRTO 432

Brian Cook

Tribunal orders applicant to provide information regarding her litigation guardian before proceeding with human rights application.

The applicant, acting as trustee for the Estate of Eva Bourgoin, filed a human rights application alleging discrimination based on disability.

The respondents requested dismissal based on a Release signed by the applicant.

The applicant argued the Release might be invalid because a litigation guardian had been appointed for her by a court order prior to signing.

Bourgoin Estate v. Maple Villa Long Term Care Centre, 2013 HRTO 429

Michelle Alton

14 cases2010–2014

Jorge Hurtado

36 cases2009–2026

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 22, 2013

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to attend scheduled hearing.

The applicant failed to attend a scheduled hearing to clarify allegations and discuss a timetable.

The Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant received notice of the hearing and the potential consequences of failing to attend.

As a result, the application was dismissed as abandoned.

Estelita Vivas v. Metropolitan Hotels and Isabel Carreiro, 2013 HRTO 307

Paula Rusak

Licence Surrendered - Retired31 cases1986–2017

Katrina Peddle

Not Practising Law5 cases2013–2017

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 12, 2013

Human rights application dismissed for delay, prior settlement, and having been addressed in another proceeding.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment by her former employer and union following a workplace injury.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application should be dismissed for delay and lack of reasonable prospect of success.

Landry v. Scapa Tapes North America, 2013 HRTO 253

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Notice of Intent to Dismiss.

The applicant filed an application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code against the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss the application on the basis that it appeared to be outside its jurisdiction.

The applicant failed to respond to the Notice by the specified deadline.

Consequently, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Achille Ruffolo v. Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, 2013 HRTO 247

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Notice of Intent to Dismiss.

The applicant filed an application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code against the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss the application as it appeared to be outside its jurisdiction.

The applicant failed to respond to the Notice by the specified deadline.

Consequently, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Achille Ruffolo v. Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, 2013 HRTO 245

Brian Cook

Reconsideration request denied as applicant failed to establish any grounds under Rule 26.5.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his human rights application because he had signed a release in favour of the respondent employer.

Amendola v. Marriott Hotels of Canada Ltd., 2013 HRTO 241

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 29, 2013

Reconsideration denied where applicant failed to explain delay or meet grounds under Rule 26.5.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a 2011 decision that dismissed her human rights application as abandoned after she failed to attend a summary hearing.

The applicant filed the request for reconsideration nine months after the decision was released, citing feeling overwhelmed and a change of address, but admitted to checking her emails regularly.

Holly Banda v. Alanna Miller, Corrine Long, and Frank Smith, 2013 HRTO 161

Jesse Nyman

Not Practising Law - Employed2 cases2012–2013

Brian Cook

Human rights application regarding disability benefits administration dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination on the basis of disability regarding the administration of his short-term disability, long-term disability, and health and welfare benefits.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application should be dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success or for being filed outside the one-year limitation period.

The allegations regarding communication were dismissed for delay.

The application was dismissed.

William Brown v. Manion, Wilkins & Associates Ltd., 2013 HRTO 137

Peikang Dai

1 case2013–2013

Brian Cook

In Private Practice8 cases2012–2022

Reconsideration request denied as applicant failed to provide valid grounds under Rule 26.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a previous Tribunal decision that dismissed his application as an abuse of process and declared him a vexatious litigant.

The applicant argued there were new facts and errors in the decision, including a dispute over the number of pages in his email attachments.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide any basis under Rule 26 to reconsider the decision, noting that the request was an attempt to reargue issues already decided.

The request for reconsideration was denied.

Dai v. Presbyterian Church in Canada, 2013 HRTO 134

Randy Ai

Ellen Low

3 cases2012–2016

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 22, 2013

Motion to remove counsel dismissed as adequate screening measures were implemented when lawyer changed firms.

The applicant brought a motion to remove the respondents' counsel due to an alleged conflict of interest.

The conflict arose when a lawyer who had previously worked on the applicant's file at her counsel's firm moved to the firm representing the respondents.

The motion to remove counsel was dismissed.

Lukasik v. 611554 Ontario Inc. o/a Palm’s Court Restaurant, 2013 HRTO 115

Mark Rowlinson

In Private Practice21 cases1995–2013

Lori Mishibinijima

12 cases2010–2017

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 16, 2013

Union granted intervener status in member's human rights application regarding a non-bargaining unit position.

The applicant alleged discrimination when she was not awarded a non-bargaining unit position, which was instead given to a bargaining unit member.

The applicant's union, the United Steelworkers, filed a request to intervene.

The applicant opposed the request, citing confidentiality concerns and arguing the union had no authority over the non-bargaining unit position.

The Tribunal granted the union's request to intervene, finding that the union could be affected if the applicant was placed in the position, as it would displace the current bargaining unit member.

The Tribunal also directed the parties to make submissions on whether the successful candidate should be given notice of the application.

Freda Schugmann v. The Corporation of the Municipality of Red Lake, 2013 HRTO 84

Brian Cook