Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalNov 23, 2022

Condominium unit owner ordered to remove dog after failing to establish Human Rights Code accommodation.

The applicant condominium corporation sought an order requiring the respondent to remove a dog from their unit, enforcing a 'no pets' declaration.

The respondent argued the dog was an emotional support animal for his grieving mother and requested accommodation under the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal found the respondent failed to provide medical evidence establishing a disability-related need for accommodation.

The Tribunal ordered the removal of the dog within six weeks and required the respondent to pay the $200 filing fee, but declined to award legal costs due to a misleading compliance letter sent by the applicant's counsel regarding access to medical information.

Peel Condominium Corporation No. 166 v. Sithamparanathan, 2022 ONCAT 130

Christopher Mendes

In Private Practice8 cases2022–2024

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalNov 16, 2022

Condominium owner ordered to remove aggressive, over-weight-limit dog after failing to establish human rights accommodation.

The applicant condominium corporation sought an order requiring the respondent to remove her dog, which exceeded the 9 kg weight limit and exhibited aggressive behaviour.

The respondent did not participate in the hearing but had previously claimed the dog was a service animal requiring accommodation under the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal found the respondent failed to establish a disability or disability-related need for a dog exceeding the weight limit.

The Tribunal upheld the board's determination that the dog was a nuisance and ordered its removal, along with costs to the applicant.

Waterloo North Condominium Corporation No. 70 v. Sinyard, 2022 ONCAT 144

Megan Macky

1 case2022–2022

Anthony Wellenreiter

Not Practising Law6 cases2011–2022

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalJul 27, 2022

Consent order issued resolving condominium dispute over noise, smoking, and pet waste, with $12,500 costs.

The applicant condominium corporation and the respondent unit owners reached a settlement during the mediation stage of the Condominium Authority Tribunal process.

The parties agreed to a consent order resolving disputes over smoking, throwing objects from the terrace, pet waste, storage, and noise nuisances.

The respondents also agreed to pay $12,500 in costs to the condominium corporation.

The Tribunal issued the consent order under section 1.47 of the Condominium Act, 1998.

Halton Condominium Corporation No. 191 v. Nicholson et al., 2022 ONCAT 82

Erik Savas

30 cases2001–2026

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalOct 15, 2021

Condominium owner ordered to clean balcony and comply with board's demand to remove nuisance dog.

The applicant condominium corporation applied to the Condominium Authority Tribunal for an order requiring the respondent owner to remove her dog from the condominium.

The respondent allowed her dog to urinate and defecate on her balcony, causing waste to fall onto the patio below.

The respondent did not participate in the hearing.

The Tribunal found that the board reasonably deemed the dog a nuisance under the declaration and ordered the respondent to clean her balcony and comply with any subsequent board order to remove the dog.

The Tribunal also awarded the applicant its filing fees and partial costs for pre-litigation legal letters, but denied legal costs for the application.

Halton Standard Condominium Corporation No. 490 v. Paikin, 2021 ONCAT 95

Bharat Kapoor

In Private Practice25 cases2021–2026

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalSep 27, 2021

Condominium owner ordered to remove modified gym equipment from balcony as it is not seasonal furniture.

The applicant condominium owner sought an order permitting him to keep a modified squat rack on his balcony, arguing it constituted 'seasonal furniture' under the condominium rules, and requested a refund of $2,476.96 in legal chargebacks.

The Condominium Authority Tribunal found that the structure, despite being modified to act as a table and hold plants, did not meet the ordinary definition of seasonal furniture and violated the rule against storing goods on balconies.

The Tribunal upheld the legal chargebacks as reasonable and ordered the applicant to remove the structure within 21 days.

No costs were awarded for the application.

Sarros v. York Region Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1445, 2021 ONCAT 86

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalJul 14, 2021

Condominium rule prohibiting parking both a car and a motorcycle in one spot upheld as reasonable.

The applicant condominium owner challenged an amended parking rule that prohibited parking both a car and a motorcycle in a single designated parking spot.

The applicant argued the rule change process was flawed, the rule was inconsistent with the condominium's Declaration, and it was unreasonable.

The Condominium Authority Tribunal found that while there were minor deficiencies in the notice of the rule amendment, they did not invalidate the rule.

The Tribunal concluded the amended rule was clear, consistent with the Declaration, and met the high threshold for reasonableness, dismissing the application.

Mui v. Ottawa-Carleton Standard Condominium Corporation No. 963, 2021 ONCAT 63

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalMay 14, 2021

Condominium corporation ordered to provide requested records and pay a $500 penalty for non-compliance.

The applicant condominium owner requested various records relating to a siding project from the respondent condominium corporation.

The respondent provided some records but failed to provide tendering documents, engineering reports, and specific invoices, and subsequently ceased participating in the Tribunal process.

The Tribunal ordered the respondent to provide the requested records, finding no exemptions applied.

The Tribunal also awarded the applicant $200 in costs and imposed a $500 penalty on the respondent for refusing to provide the records without reasonable excuse.

Nickason v. Wellington Standard Condominium Corporation No. 108, 2021 ONCAT 45

Justin McLarty

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalApr 13, 2021

Condominium corporation ordered to explain redactions and pay $350 penalty for delayed records production.

The applicant, a condominium unit owner, filed multiple requests for records from the respondent condominium corporation shortly after its turnover meeting.

While many records were provided or resolved during mediation, several remained in dispute at the adjudication stage.

The Tribunal found that the respondent had adequately responded to most requests but failed to provide a written statement explaining redactions to unaudited financial records as required by the regulations.

The Tribunal ordered the respondent to provide the missing explanations, attempt to locate pre-turnover board minutes, and pay a $350 penalty for delays, along with $200 in costs.

Harrison v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2714, 2021 ONCAT 30

Justin McLarty

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalJan 29, 2021

Condominium corporation ordered to disclose reserve fund plan and concluded litigation records to unit owner.

The applicant, a condominium unit owner, filed a request for records from the respondent condominium corporation.

Following a hearing, the Condominium Authority Tribunal ordered the respondent to provide the plan for the future funding of the reserve fund and to review and disclose records relating to concluded litigation, finding that the statutory exemption for litigation records ends when the litigation concludes, subject to solicitor-client privilege.

The Tribunal dismissed the applicant's request for a penalty but ordered the respondent to reimburse the applicant's $200 filing fee.

Wei v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2297, 2021 ONCAT 8

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalFeb 27, 2020

Consent order issued resolving condominium records dispute following Stage 2 Mediation.

The applicant and respondent condominium corporation resolved a records dispute during Stage 2 Mediation.

The parties agreed that the requested documents had been provided with appropriate redactions, and the respondent agreed to pay the applicant $400.

The Condominium Authority Tribunal issued a consent order incorporating these terms and concluding the application.

Olakemi Sobohemin v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2600, 2020 ONCAT 6

Indira Sawh

Not Practising Law23 cases2010–2017

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioDec 11, 2017

Human rights applications dismissed as abuse of process after applicant repeatedly failed to attend preliminary hearings.

The applicant filed human rights applications alleging reprisal and discrimination.

The Tribunal scheduled a summary hearing, which was converted to a preliminary hearing after the applicant claimed she was medically unfit to participate.

Despite multiple directions and warnings, the applicant refused to attend the scheduled telephone conference calls to discuss how her applications should be handled.

The Tribunal found that her refusal to attend constituted an abuse of process, dismissed the applications, and ordered that she must obtain Tribunal consent before filing any future applications against the respondent.

Tran v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2017 HRTO 1641

Brian Cook

Practising Law - Employed1 case2017–2017

Tribunal finds good faith explanation for 17-month delay in filing human rights application.

The applicant filed a human rights application on behalf of her son 17 months after the expiry of the one-year limitation period under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal held a preliminary hearing to determine if there was a good faith explanation for the delay.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's personal circumstances, including caring for her son on the autism spectrum, living in a shelter, motor vehicle accidents, and medical evidence of anxiety and depression, established a good faith explanation for the delay.

The Tribunal requested written submissions from the respondents on whether the delay resulted in substantial prejudice before making a final decision.

T.P. v. St. Clair Catholic District School Board, 2017 HRTO 1622

John McKinnon

Greg Bullen

50 cases2009–2019

Brian Cook

Practising Law - Employed16 cases2017–2023

Interim monetary compensation of $15,000 ordered to allow applicant to seek urgent psychological counselling.

Following a finding that the respondent infringed the applicant's rights under the Human Rights Code, a hearing was convened to determine the appropriate remedy.

The applicant presented evidence of an urgent need for psychological counselling due to severe distress.

With the agreement of the parties, the Tribunal issued an interim decision ordering the respondent to pay $15,000 in monetary compensation to allow the applicant to arrange treatment independently, with full reasons to follow.

Lawson v. Workplace Safety and Insurance Board, 2017 HRTO 1621

Peter Duda

3 cases2017–2020

Monica Tessier

Derek Zulianello

4 cases2017–2022

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioDec 4, 2017

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

The applicant failed to attend a scheduled summary hearing held by telephone conference call.

The respondents attended.

As the Notice of Hearing warned that failure to attend could result in the application being dismissed as abandoned, the Tribunal dismissed the application on that basis.

Ricky Rakowski-Burns v. The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, 2017 CanLII 83229

Brian Cook

Reconsideration request denied as applicant failed to establish grounds under the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a decision that dismissed his human rights application for being filed outside the one-year time limit under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The applicant sought to consolidate his 2016 application with a newer 2017 application to establish a timely 'series of incidents.' The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the allegations in the two applications were unrelated and that the request did not meet any of the criteria for reconsideration under Rule 26.5 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

Eugene Johnson v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services, 2017 HRTO 1594

Brian Cook

In Private Practice3 cases2017–2025

Request to dismiss application denied; Ministry of Labour investigation did not address human rights allegations.

The applicant alleged discrimination and harassment in employment based on disability.

The respondent requested that the application be dismissed, arguing that the substance of the application had been appropriately dealt with through a Ministry of Labour investigation.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the Ministry investigation only concerned the employer's compliance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act regarding workplace harassment procedures and did not address the human rights allegations or the reasons for the applicant's termination.

Dobson v. Gates Canada Inc., 2017 HRTO 1593

Sarah A. Eves

9 cases1994–2017

Christopher Achkar

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioNov 22, 2017

Application withdrawn with prejudice regarding future Tribunal proceedings on the same issues.

The applicant filed a Request to Withdraw the human rights application.

The respondents consented but requested the withdrawal be marked 'with prejudice' to prevent re-litigation.

The Tribunal granted the withdrawal with prejudice regarding future applications to the Tribunal on the same issues, noting it has no jurisdiction to make orders regarding other potential proceedings.

Delaney v. Markham Stouffville Hospital Corporation, 2017 HRTO 1537

Brian Cook

In Private Practice29 cases2011–2025

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned due to applicant's failure to maintain current contact information.

The applicant filed a human rights application but failed to provide a complete application or updated contact information.

All mail sent by the Tribunal was returned as undeliverable.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had abandoned the application and dismissed it on that basis.

Delroy Apple v. Toronto Police Services, 2017 HRTO 1532

Olanyi Parsons

Lisa Newton

Practising Law - Employed2 cases2016–2017

Brian Cook

Employment and Labour Law

Requests to dismiss human rights application for timeliness and lack of merit denied pending evidence.

The respondent requested that the human rights application be dismissed for being out of time or for having no reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal denied both requests, finding that evidence was required to determine whether there was a series of incidents within the meaning of section 34(b) of the Human Rights Code, and that the merits of the application could not be assessed without evidence.

The requests for dismissal and a summary hearing were denied at this time.

Baxter v. Queen’s University, 2017 HRTO 1528

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

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

Richard MacGregor

3 cases2022–2023

Natalia Polis

55 cases2019–2026

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalDec 20, 2022

Condominium owner found in breach of noise settlement; corporation ordered to investigate sound insulation complaints.

The respondent denied the noise was excessive, arguing the building had inadequate sound insulation and that he also experienced noise from neighbouring units.

The Tribunal found the respondent breached the settlement agreement and ordered him to respect the quiet enjoyment of others.

However, the Tribunal also ordered the applicant to investigate the respondent's complaints regarding noise transmission into his unit.

The respondent was ordered to pay half of the applicant's legal costs.

Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1978 v. Hackman, 2022 ONCAT 143

Victor Yee

43 cases2016–2026

Ira Greenspoon

In Private Practice6 cases2006–2022

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalNov 23, 2022

Condominium unit owner ordered to remove dog after failing to establish Human Rights Code accommodation.

The applicant condominium corporation sought an order requiring the respondent to remove a dog from their unit, enforcing a 'no pets' declaration.

The respondent argued the dog was an emotional support animal for his grieving mother and requested accommodation under the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal found the respondent failed to provide medical evidence establishing a disability-related need for accommodation.

Peel Condominium Corporation No. 166 v. Sithamparanathan, 2022 ONCAT 130

Christopher Mendes

In Private Practice8 cases2022–2024

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalNov 16, 2022

Condominium owner ordered to remove aggressive, over-weight-limit dog after failing to establish human rights accommodation.

The applicant condominium corporation sought an order requiring the respondent to remove her dog, which exceeded the 9 kg weight limit and exhibited aggressive behaviour.

The respondent did not participate in the hearing but had previously claimed the dog was a service animal requiring accommodation under the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal found the respondent failed to establish a disability or disability-related need for a dog exceeding the weight limit.

The Tribunal upheld the board's determination that the dog was a nuisance and ordered its removal, along with costs to the applicant.

Waterloo North Condominium Corporation No. 70 v. Sinyard, 2022 ONCAT 144

Megan Macky

1 case2022–2022

Anthony Wellenreiter

Not Practising Law6 cases2011–2022

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalJul 27, 2022

Consent order issued resolving condominium dispute over noise, smoking, and pet waste, with $12,500 costs.

The applicant condominium corporation and the respondent unit owners reached a settlement during the mediation stage of the Condominium Authority Tribunal process.

The parties agreed to a consent order resolving disputes over smoking, throwing objects from the terrace, pet waste, storage, and noise nuisances.

The respondents also agreed to pay $12,500 in costs to the condominium corporation.

The Tribunal issued the consent order under section 1.47 of the Condominium Act, 1998.

Halton Condominium Corporation No. 191 v. Nicholson et al., 2022 ONCAT 82

Erik Savas

30 cases2001–2026

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalOct 15, 2021

Condominium owner ordered to clean balcony and comply with board's demand to remove nuisance dog.

The applicant condominium corporation applied to the Condominium Authority Tribunal for an order requiring the respondent owner to remove her dog from the condominium.

The respondent allowed her dog to urinate and defecate on her balcony, causing waste to fall onto the patio below.

The respondent did not participate in the hearing.

The Tribunal also awarded the applicant its filing fees and partial costs for pre-litigation legal letters, but denied legal costs for the application.

Halton Standard Condominium Corporation No. 490 v. Paikin, 2021 ONCAT 95

Bharat Kapoor

In Private Practice25 cases2021–2026

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalSep 27, 2021

Condominium owner ordered to remove modified gym equipment from balcony as it is not seasonal furniture.

The Tribunal upheld the legal chargebacks as reasonable and ordered the applicant to remove the structure within 21 days.

No costs were awarded for the application.

Sarros v. York Region Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1445, 2021 ONCAT 86

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalJul 14, 2021

Condominium rule prohibiting parking both a car and a motorcycle in one spot upheld as reasonable.

The applicant condominium owner challenged an amended parking rule that prohibited parking both a car and a motorcycle in a single designated parking spot.

The applicant argued the rule change process was flawed, the rule was inconsistent with the condominium's Declaration, and it was unreasonable.

The Condominium Authority Tribunal found that while there were minor deficiencies in the notice of the rule amendment, they did not invalidate the rule.

The Tribunal concluded the amended rule was clear, consistent with the Declaration, and met the high threshold for reasonableness, dismissing the application.

Mui v. Ottawa-Carleton Standard Condominium Corporation No. 963, 2021 ONCAT 63

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalMay 14, 2021

Condominium corporation ordered to provide requested records and pay a $500 penalty for non-compliance.

The applicant condominium owner requested various records relating to a siding project from the respondent condominium corporation.

The respondent provided some records but failed to provide tendering documents, engineering reports, and specific invoices, and subsequently ceased participating in the Tribunal process.

The Tribunal ordered the respondent to provide the requested records, finding no exemptions applied.

The Tribunal also awarded the applicant $200 in costs and imposed a $500 penalty on the respondent for refusing to provide the records without reasonable excuse.

Nickason v. Wellington Standard Condominium Corporation No. 108, 2021 ONCAT 45

Justin McLarty

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalApr 13, 2021

Condominium corporation ordered to explain redactions and pay $350 penalty for delayed records production.

The applicant, a condominium unit owner, filed multiple requests for records from the respondent condominium corporation shortly after its turnover meeting.

While many records were provided or resolved during mediation, several remained in dispute at the adjudication stage.

The Tribunal ordered the respondent to provide the missing explanations, attempt to locate pre-turnover board minutes, and pay a $350 penalty for delays, along with $200 in costs.

Harrison v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2714, 2021 ONCAT 30

Justin McLarty

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalJan 29, 2021

Condominium corporation ordered to disclose reserve fund plan and concluded litigation records to unit owner.

The applicant, a condominium unit owner, filed a request for records from the respondent condominium corporation.

The Tribunal dismissed the applicant's request for a penalty but ordered the respondent to reimburse the applicant's $200 filing fee.

Wei v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2297, 2021 ONCAT 8

Brian Cook

OCATCondominium Authority TribunalFeb 27, 2020

Consent order issued resolving condominium records dispute following Stage 2 Mediation.

The applicant and respondent condominium corporation resolved a records dispute during Stage 2 Mediation.

The parties agreed that the requested documents had been provided with appropriate redactions, and the respondent agreed to pay the applicant $400.

The Condominium Authority Tribunal issued a consent order incorporating these terms and concluding the application.

Olakemi Sobohemin v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2600, 2020 ONCAT 6

Indira Sawh

Not Practising Law23 cases2010–2017

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioDec 11, 2017

Human rights applications dismissed as abuse of process after applicant repeatedly failed to attend preliminary hearings.

The applicant filed human rights applications alleging reprisal and discrimination.

The Tribunal scheduled a summary hearing, which was converted to a preliminary hearing after the applicant claimed she was medically unfit to participate.

Despite multiple directions and warnings, the applicant refused to attend the scheduled telephone conference calls to discuss how her applications should be handled.

Tran v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2017 HRTO 1641

Brian Cook

Practising Law - Employed1 case2017–2017

Tribunal finds good faith explanation for 17-month delay in filing human rights application.

The applicant filed a human rights application on behalf of her son 17 months after the expiry of the one-year limitation period under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal held a preliminary hearing to determine if there was a good faith explanation for the delay.

The Tribunal requested written submissions from the respondents on whether the delay resulted in substantial prejudice before making a final decision.

T.P. v. St. Clair Catholic District School Board, 2017 HRTO 1622

John McKinnon

Greg Bullen

50 cases2009–2019

Brian Cook

Practising Law - Employed16 cases2017–2023

Interim monetary compensation of $15,000 ordered to allow applicant to seek urgent psychological counselling.

Following a finding that the respondent infringed the applicant's rights under the Human Rights Code, a hearing was convened to determine the appropriate remedy.

The applicant presented evidence of an urgent need for psychological counselling due to severe distress.

Lawson v. Workplace Safety and Insurance Board, 2017 HRTO 1621

Peter Duda

3 cases2017–2020

Monica Tessier

Derek Zulianello

4 cases2017–2022

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioDec 4, 2017

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

The applicant failed to attend a scheduled summary hearing held by telephone conference call.

The respondents attended.

As the Notice of Hearing warned that failure to attend could result in the application being dismissed as abandoned, the Tribunal dismissed the application on that basis.

Ricky Rakowski-Burns v. The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, 2017 CanLII 83229

Brian Cook

Reconsideration request denied as applicant failed to establish grounds under the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a decision that dismissed his human rights application for being filed outside the one-year time limit under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.

Eugene Johnson v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services, 2017 HRTO 1594

Brian Cook

In Private Practice3 cases2017–2025

Request to dismiss application denied; Ministry of Labour investigation did not address human rights allegations.

The applicant alleged discrimination and harassment in employment based on disability.

The respondent requested that the application be dismissed, arguing that the substance of the application had been appropriately dealt with through a Ministry of Labour investigation.

Dobson v. Gates Canada Inc., 2017 HRTO 1593

Sarah A. Eves

9 cases1994–2017

Christopher Achkar

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioNov 22, 2017

Application withdrawn with prejudice regarding future Tribunal proceedings on the same issues.

The applicant filed a Request to Withdraw the human rights application.

The respondents consented but requested the withdrawal be marked 'with prejudice' to prevent re-litigation.

Delaney v. Markham Stouffville Hospital Corporation, 2017 HRTO 1537

Brian Cook

In Private Practice29 cases2011–2025

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned due to applicant's failure to maintain current contact information.

The applicant filed a human rights application but failed to provide a complete application or updated contact information.

All mail sent by the Tribunal was returned as undeliverable.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had abandoned the application and dismissed it on that basis.

Delroy Apple v. Toronto Police Services, 2017 HRTO 1532

Olanyi Parsons

Lisa Newton

Practising Law - Employed2 cases2016–2017

Brian Cook