Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 18, 2011

Age discrimination claim dismissed; occasional teacher list restrictions based on retirement status, not age.

The applicant, a retired primary school teacher, alleged age discrimination after the respondent school board denied her application to be on the occasional teacher list.

The board's policy required retired teachers to have certification in specific subjects, a requirement not imposed on new graduates.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the policy restricted the applicant's placement on the list because of her retired status and receipt of a pension, not because of her age.

The distinction was based on employment status, which is not a prohibited ground under the Human Rights Code.

Law v. Thames Valley District School Board, 2011 HRTO 953

Request for reconsideration denied where applicant failed to adequately explain absence from summary hearing.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his human rights application after he failed to attend a scheduled summary hearing.

The applicant argued his failure to attend was due to an acute viral illness and a belief that he would be arrested if he participated.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had not provided an adequate explanation for his failure to participate, even by telephone, and had not met the criteria for reconsideration under Rule 26.5.

The request for reconsideration was denied.

McIntrye v. Loblaw Companies, 2011 HRTO 941

Brian Cook

Practising Law - Employed28 cases2009–2023

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.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (NOID) on the basis that the application appeared to be outside its jurisdiction, and directed the applicant to respond by a specified date.

The applicant failed to respond to the NOID.

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

Shirley Cutcliffe v. North York General Hospital and Cathie Badeau, 2011 HRTO 837

Jo-Ann Seamon

Brian Cook

Tribunal awards limited lost wages and $4,000 for injury to dignity for failure to accommodate.

The Tribunal held a hearing to determine the appropriate remedy after finding that the respondent failed to accommodate the applicant's disability.

The applicant sought lost wages and $15,000 for injury to dignity.

The Tribunal awarded limited compensation for lost wages, finding that the medical evidence showed the applicant only required accommodation for a short period before his condition improved sufficiently to perform the offered work.

The Tribunal also awarded $4,000 for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect, noting that the applicant's failure to communicate his improved condition mitigated the respondent's liability for the full period claimed.

Boyce v. Toronto Community Housing Corporation, 2011 HRTO 827

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 21, 2011

Request to defer human rights application denied after applicant withdrew related grievance.

The respondents requested that the Tribunal defer consideration of the human rights application pending the completion of a related grievance procedure.

The applicant subsequently withdrew her grievance.

The Tribunal found there was no longer any basis to defer the application and directed that it continue to be processed.

Auld v. Ontario New Democratic Party Caucus, 2011 HRTO 800

Brian Cook

Human rights application deferred pending the outcome of the applicant's related Employment Standards Act appeal.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer because the applicant had ongoing related proceedings before the WSIB and the OLRB regarding an ESA claim.

The Tribunal found that the ESA appeal, which would likely address the circumstances of the end of the applicant's employment, raised overlapping factual issues.

The Tribunal deferred the application pending the conclusion of the ESA proceeding to avoid concurrent proceedings and inconsistent decisions.

Janos Burai v. Hilton Niagara Falls Fallsview, 2011 HRTO 805

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.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (NOID) because the application appeared to be outside its jurisdiction.

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

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

Morgan v. Yorkview Lifecare Centre, 2011 HRTO 790

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.

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

The applicant failed to respond to the Notice within the required timeframe.

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

Claris Clarke v. Yorkview Lifecare Centre, 2011 HRTO 789

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.

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

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

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

Precious McLeod v. Yorkview Lifecare Centre, 2011 HRTO 788

Brian Cook

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

The applicant filed an application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code.

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

The applicant was directed to respond but failed to do so by the deadline.

As a result, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Patterson v. Yorkview Lifecare Centre, 2011 HRTO 787

Brian Cook

Human rights application deferred pending resolution of related criminal proceedings against the respondent.

The respondents requested that the Tribunal defer consideration of the human rights application until a related criminal matter involving the respondent is resolved.

The Tribunal granted the request, noting that deferral prevents concurrent proceedings and inconsistent decisions, and avoids prejudicing the respondent in the criminal proceedings.

C.K. v. C[...] inc. and H.S., 2011 HRTO 785

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.

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

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

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

Aria Javan v. Ontario Children’s Lawyer Office, 2011 HRTO 777

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 s. 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (NOID) on the basis that the application appeared to be outside its jurisdiction, directing the applicant to respond by a specified date.

The applicant failed to respond to the NOID.

As a result, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Frank Lima v. Cara Airlines Solution, 2011 HRTO 776

Brian Cook

Reconsideration request denied as applicant failed to provide new determinative evidence.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of sex and family status by a Children's Aid Society.

The applicant submitted what he claimed was new evidence, including a letter from his spouse, a CAS publication, a family court decision, and a newspaper article.

The Tribunal found that the request was largely an attempt to re-argue the case and that none of the submitted materials constituted new, determinative evidence that could not have been obtained earlier.

The request for reconsideration was denied.

D.F. v. Children’s Aid Society of Hamilton, 2011 HRTO 754

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 18, 2011

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

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

The Tribunal had previously deferred the application pending the conclusion of ongoing grievance proceedings.

The Tribunal subsequently wrote to the applicant requesting an update on the grievance proceedings and warning that failure to respond could result in dismissal for abandonment.

The applicant failed to respond to the Tribunal's inquiry.

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

Wendy Besner v. Hydro One Networks Inc., 2011 HRTO 757

Brian Cook

In Private Practice7 cases2011–2024

Tribunal directed parties to provide submissions on whether human rights application should be deferred.

The applicant, who self-identifies as a Christian Naturist, alleged discrimination and reprisal on the basis of creed by the respondent police service.

The Tribunal previously declined to dismiss the application under section 34(11) of the Human Rights Code.

Noting that there appeared to be ongoing civil and criminal proceedings related to the factual background of the application, the Tribunal issued an interim decision on its own initiative under section 45 of the Code and Rule 14, directing the parties to provide information and submissions on whether the application should be deferred pending the resolution of the court proceedings.

Coldin v. Ontario Provincial Police, 2011 HRTO 726

Norman Ronski

Brian Cook

Tribunal declines to dismiss discrimination application at summary hearing, finding potential link to disability.

The applicant, who uses a mobility scooter, alleged that the respondents discriminated against him based on disability when they refused to sell him a scooter after he disclosed his mental health issues.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application should be dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success.

Because the applicant provided additional details during the hearing that established a potential link between the refusal of service and his disability, the Tribunal declined to dismiss the application and ordered the respondents to file a response.

Basic v. Home Medical Equipment, 2011 HRTO 724

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 13, 2011

Union granted leave to intervene in member's human rights application alleging employment discrimination.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability.

The applicant's union, AMAPCEO, filed a Request to Intervene.

Neither the applicant nor the respondent opposed the request.

The Tribunal granted the union leave to intervene, noting that a bargaining agent generally has an interest in a human rights application brought by an employee in its bargaining unit.

Alves v. Financial Services Commission of Ontario, 2011 HRTO 709

Shaheen Hirani

Suspended Administratively14 cases1997–2022

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 12, 2011

Human rights application dismissed at summary hearing for lacking a reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant, an employee of the corporate respondent, alleged discrimination in employment on the grounds of race, colour, ancestry, ethnic origin, and creed.

The allegations stemmed from a workplace altercation, subsequent job posting denials, and the union's refusal to pursue grievances.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application had a reasonable prospect of success.

Finding that the applicant's allegations were based on speculation and lacked any link to a Code-protected ground, the Tribunal dismissed the application.

Gerrick v. Ceva Logistics, 2011 HRTO 712

Susan Munn

Not Practising Law89 cases2008–2020

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 11, 2011

Adjournment granted due to applicant's medical condition, with next hearing date peremptory.

The applicant requested an adjournment of the scheduled hearing on the basis that she was medically unable to attend due to a broken ankle.

The respondents opposed the request and sought dismissal of the application.

The Tribunal noted that the applicant's medical report indicated she needed to elevate her ankle above her heart frequently, making attendance difficult.

Despite concerns about the late submission of the medical report and the applicant's lack of communication with her representative, the Tribunal granted the adjournment, making the next hearing date peremptory on the applicant.

Morris v. Ontario (Finance), 2011 HRTO 684

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

Peter Thorup

Licence Surrendered - Retired22 cases1985–2016

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 18, 2011

Age discrimination claim dismissed; occasional teacher list restrictions based on retirement status, not age.

The applicant, a retired primary school teacher, alleged age discrimination after the respondent school board denied her application to be on the occasional teacher list.

The board's policy required retired teachers to have certification in specific subjects, a requirement not imposed on new graduates.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the policy restricted the applicant's placement on the list because of her retired status and receipt of a pension, not because of her age.

The distinction was based on employment status, which is not a prohibited ground under the Human Rights Code.

Law v. Thames Valley District School Board, 2011 HRTO 953

McLean Wood

Not Practising Law2 cases2004–2011

David Ross

7 cases2003–2017

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 17, 2011

Request for reconsideration denied where applicant failed to adequately explain absence from summary hearing.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his human rights application after he failed to attend a scheduled summary hearing.

The applicant argued his failure to attend was due to an acute viral illness and a belief that he would be arrested if he participated.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had not provided an adequate explanation for his failure to participate, even by telephone, and had not met the criteria for reconsideration under Rule 26.5.

The request for reconsideration was denied.

McIntrye v. Loblaw Companies, 2011 HRTO 941

Brian Cook

Practising Law - Employed28 cases2009–2023

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.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (NOID) on the basis that the application appeared to be outside its jurisdiction, and directed the applicant to respond by a specified date.

The applicant failed to respond to the NOID.

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

Shirley Cutcliffe v. North York General Hospital and Cathie Badeau, 2011 HRTO 837

Jo-Ann Seamon

Brian Cook

Tribunal awards limited lost wages and $4,000 for injury to dignity for failure to accommodate.

The Tribunal held a hearing to determine the appropriate remedy after finding that the respondent failed to accommodate the applicant's disability.

The applicant sought lost wages and $15,000 for injury to dignity.

Boyce v. Toronto Community Housing Corporation, 2011 HRTO 827

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 21, 2011

Request to defer human rights application denied after applicant withdrew related grievance.

The respondents requested that the Tribunal defer consideration of the human rights application pending the completion of a related grievance procedure.

The applicant subsequently withdrew her grievance.

The Tribunal found there was no longer any basis to defer the application and directed that it continue to be processed.

Auld v. Ontario New Democratic Party Caucus, 2011 HRTO 800

Brian Cook

Human rights application deferred pending the outcome of the applicant's related Employment Standards Act appeal.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer because the applicant had ongoing related proceedings before the WSIB and the OLRB regarding an ESA claim.

The Tribunal found that the ESA appeal, which would likely address the circumstances of the end of the applicant's employment, raised overlapping factual issues.

The Tribunal deferred the application pending the conclusion of the ESA proceeding to avoid concurrent proceedings and inconsistent decisions.

Janos Burai v. Hilton Niagara Falls Fallsview, 2011 HRTO 805

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.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (NOID) because the application appeared to be outside its jurisdiction.

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

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

Morgan v. Yorkview Lifecare Centre, 2011 HRTO 790

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.

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

The applicant failed to respond to the Notice within the required timeframe.

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

Claris Clarke v. Yorkview Lifecare Centre, 2011 HRTO 789

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.

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

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

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

Precious McLeod v. Yorkview Lifecare Centre, 2011 HRTO 788

Brian Cook

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

The applicant filed an application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code.

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

The applicant was directed to respond but failed to do so by the deadline.

As a result, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Patterson v. Yorkview Lifecare Centre, 2011 HRTO 787

Brian Cook

Human rights application deferred pending resolution of related criminal proceedings against the respondent.

The respondents requested that the Tribunal defer consideration of the human rights application until a related criminal matter involving the respondent is resolved.

The Tribunal granted the request, noting that deferral prevents concurrent proceedings and inconsistent decisions, and avoids prejudicing the respondent in the criminal proceedings.

C.K. v. C[...] inc. and H.S., 2011 HRTO 785

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.

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

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

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

Aria Javan v. Ontario Children’s Lawyer Office, 2011 HRTO 777

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 s. 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (NOID) on the basis that the application appeared to be outside its jurisdiction, directing the applicant to respond by a specified date.

The applicant failed to respond to the NOID.

As a result, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Frank Lima v. Cara Airlines Solution, 2011 HRTO 776

Brian Cook

Reconsideration request denied as applicant failed to provide new determinative evidence.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of sex and family status by a Children's Aid Society.

The applicant submitted what he claimed was new evidence, including a letter from his spouse, a CAS publication, a family court decision, and a newspaper article.

The request for reconsideration was denied.

D.F. v. Children’s Aid Society of Hamilton, 2011 HRTO 754

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 18, 2011

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

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

The Tribunal had previously deferred the application pending the conclusion of ongoing grievance proceedings.

The Tribunal subsequently wrote to the applicant requesting an update on the grievance proceedings and warning that failure to respond could result in dismissal for abandonment.

The applicant failed to respond to the Tribunal's inquiry.

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

Wendy Besner v. Hydro One Networks Inc., 2011 HRTO 757

Brian Cook

In Private Practice7 cases2011–2024

Tribunal directed parties to provide submissions on whether human rights application should be deferred.

The applicant, who self-identifies as a Christian Naturist, alleged discrimination and reprisal on the basis of creed by the respondent police service.

The Tribunal previously declined to dismiss the application under section 34(11) of the Human Rights Code.

Coldin v. Ontario Provincial Police, 2011 HRTO 726

Norman Ronski

Brian Cook

Tribunal declines to dismiss discrimination application at summary hearing, finding potential link to disability.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application should be dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success.

Basic v. Home Medical Equipment, 2011 HRTO 724

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 13, 2011

Union granted leave to intervene in member's human rights application alleging employment discrimination.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability.

The applicant's union, AMAPCEO, filed a Request to Intervene.

Neither the applicant nor the respondent opposed the request.

The Tribunal granted the union leave to intervene, noting that a bargaining agent generally has an interest in a human rights application brought by an employee in its bargaining unit.

Alves v. Financial Services Commission of Ontario, 2011 HRTO 709

Shaheen Hirani

Suspended Administratively14 cases1997–2022

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 12, 2011

Human rights application dismissed at summary hearing for lacking a reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant, an employee of the corporate respondent, alleged discrimination in employment on the grounds of race, colour, ancestry, ethnic origin, and creed.

The allegations stemmed from a workplace altercation, subsequent job posting denials, and the union's refusal to pursue grievances.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application had a reasonable prospect of success.

Finding that the applicant's allegations were based on speculation and lacked any link to a Code-protected ground, the Tribunal dismissed the application.

Gerrick v. Ceva Logistics, 2011 HRTO 712

Susan Munn

Not Practising Law89 cases2008–2020

Brian Cook