Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 30, 2010

Human rights application dismissed; temporary worker's contract terminated due to argumentative behaviour, not place of origin.

The applicant, a temporary agency worker, alleged discrimination in employment on the basis of place of origin after her two-week contract with the organizational respondent was terminated after less than one day.

The applicant, who self-identifies as European and speaks with an accent, claimed she was treated dismissively and terminated for discriminatory reasons.

The Tribunal found that the respondents provided a complete, non-discriminatory explanation for the termination, specifically that the applicant was argumentative and confrontational with staff regarding assigned tasks.

The application was dismissed as there was no evidence to support the allegation of discrimination.

Beata Philip v. United Way/Centraide Ottawa, 2010 HRTO 1774

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 27, 2010

Tribunal schedules oral hearing to determine if delay in filing human rights application was in good faith.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the grounds of disability and age, more than one year after the last alleged incident.

The respondent requested dismissal due to delay, arguing lack of good faith and substantial prejudice.

The Tribunal found that further evidence was required regarding the applicant's medical condition and the respondent's claim of prejudice, and scheduled a half-day oral hearing to determine whether the conditions for extending the time limit under section 34(2) of the Human Rights Code were met.

Andrew Langlois v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2010 HRTO 1778

Brian Cook

Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the respondent is a federal entity.

The applicant filed an application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code alleging discrimination by the Board of Referees, which was established under the federal Employment Insurance Act.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

The applicant argued the Board was independent of the federal government.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the Board of Referees falls under federal jurisdiction and is not subject to the Ontario Human Rights Code.

Andrei Starostenko v. Board of Referees, 2010 HRTO 1743

Brian Cook

In Private Practice14 cases2009–2023

Human rights application deferred pending completion of concurrent union grievance arbitration.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination on the ground of disability.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer because the applicant's union had filed a grievance based on the same facts and issues.

The applicant opposed deferral, expressing lack of confidence in the grievance process.

The Tribunal deferred the application, noting that grievance arbitrators have the authority to enforce human rights obligations and that the orderly administration of justice favours deferral to the concurrent proceeding.

Starostenko v. InterContinental Yorkville Hotel, 2010 HRTO 1742

Mary Catherine Chambers

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 13, 2010

Human rights application dismissed after applicant failed to attend hearing and provided no evidence of discrimination.

The applicant alleged discrimination on the basis of race, colour, place of origin, disability, and creed after being denied admission to a university program.

The applicant failed to attend the scheduled hearing.

The Tribunal proceeded in the applicant's absence and dismissed the application, finding that the respondents had no role in the university's admission decision and that there was no evidence to support the allegations of discrimination or reprisal.

Brown v. Seven Generations Education Institute, 2010 HRTO 1684

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 6, 2010

Human rights application dismissed as applicant failed to establish a factual basis for discrimination allegations.

The applicant alleged discrimination on various Code grounds after being told he was no longer welcome as a member of the respondent organization.

The Tribunal heard evidence from the applicant but found he could not provide a factual basis or point to any evidence supporting his allegations of discrimination or harassment based on Code-protected grounds.

The Tribunal concluded the disputes arose from personality clashes and political differences, not Code-protected grounds, and dismissed the application.

Mesfin Yikuno v. Unity for Human Rights and Democracy, 2010 HRTO 1611

Cathy Baker

1 case2010–2010

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 22, 2010

Reconsideration granted to allow application against union to proceed, as previous dismissal grounds only applied to employer.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his human rights application against both his employer and his union.

The original dismissal was based on section 53(8) of the Human Rights Code, as the subject matter was substantially the same as a complaint previously filed with the Human Rights Commission.

However, the Commission complaint only named the employer, not the union.

The Tribunal granted the reconsideration request with respect to the union, finding that the section 53(8) bar did not apply to it.

A teleconference hearing was scheduled to address the union's arguments that the application against it should be dismissed for delay and failure to disclose a prima facie case.

Prescod v. National Steel Car, 2010 HRTO 1586

Geoff Laplante

3 cases2010–2022

Brian Cook

Employer ordered to pay $13,600 after terminating employee shortly after she disclosed her pregnancy.

The applicant alleged that her employment as a Customer Service Representative was terminated because she disclosed she was pregnant, contrary to the Human Rights Code.

The respondents claimed she was terminated due to performance issues, specifically slowness and speaking too softly.

The Tribunal found that while there were legitimate performance issues, the discovery of the applicant's pregnancy was a factor that contributed significantly to the decision to terminate her employment.

The Tribunal awarded the applicant $3,600 for wage loss and $10,000 for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect.

Jessie Guay v. 1481979 Ontario Inc. and Michael Angst, 2010 HRTO 1563

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed as it was filed outside the one-year limitation period without explanation.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of place of origin, stating he was laid off on January 30, 2009.

The application was filed on February 23, 2010, more than one year after the last alleged discriminatory event.

The Tribunal requested submissions explaining the delay and how the allegations fell within the Code, but none were received.

The Tribunal dismissed the application as it was filed outside the one-year limitation period under section 34 of the Code and there was no basis to conclude the delay was incurred in good faith.

Bogdan Jarocki v. Custom Wood Fabricating, 2010 HRTO 1511

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 15, 2010

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

The applicant filed an application with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario and later advised that he was negotiating a resolution with the respondent.

The Tribunal requested an update on the status of the application and warned that failure to respond could result in dismissal for abandonment.

The applicant failed to respond by the deadline.

The Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Brian Richards-Kajanto v. Marie Potvin, 2010 HRTO 1534

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 9, 2010

Request to proceed with human rights application granted following conclusion of related WSIAT proceeding.

The applicant filed a request to proceed with their human rights application following the conclusion of a related proceeding before the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal (WSIAT).

The respondent did not reply to the request.

The Tribunal granted the request to proceed and directed the Registrar to schedule the matter for mediation, as both parties had agreed to try mediation.

Yinong Cui v. MSM, a division of Magna Powertrain Inc., 2010 HRTO 1503

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 8, 2010

Respondents given final extension to file response to human rights application before proceeding without them.

The applicant filed a human rights application.

The respondents failed to file a response within the required 35-day period.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision warning the respondents that failure to participate could lead to orders against them without their participation, and granted them a final extension to July 16, 2010, to file a response with an explanation for the delay.

Deeks v. Brantford Comfort Inn, 2010 HRTO 1498

Brian Cook

Personal respondents removed from human rights application where corporate respondent was vicariously liable for policy enforcement.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment because she was required to remove her wedding rings to comply with the corporate respondent's hand hygiene policy.

The respondents brought a request for an order during proceedings to remove the personal respondents, arguing they were acting in the normal course of their employment.

The Tribunal applied the established factors for removing personal respondents, noting that the corporate respondent was vicariously liable.

Finding no compelling reason to keep the personal respondents in the proceeding, the Tribunal granted the request and removed them.

Kropf v. Grand River Hospital, 2010 HRTO 1478

Brian Cook

Human rights application deferred pending completion of concurrent union grievance proceeding.

The applicant filed a human rights application that overlapped with an ongoing union grievance proceeding.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer.

The respondent requested deferral, while the applicant did not respond.

The Tribunal deferred the application pending the completion of the grievance process, noting that grievance arbitrators have the authority to enforce human rights obligations and that deferral favors the orderly administration of justice.

Grosman v. Providence Care Mental Health Services, 2010 HRTO 1474

Application alleging sex discrimination in university promotion and salary, and failure to investigate, dismissed.

The applicant, a university professor, alleged discrimination in employment on the basis of sex.

She claimed that her promotion process to full Professor was marred by discriminatory factors, that she experienced a negative salary differential compared to a male colleague, and that the university failed to properly investigate her complaints.

The Tribunal found that while the applicant experienced difficulties in her promotion process, there was no evidence that these difficulties or her salary differential were due to her sex.

The Tribunal also found that the university did not breach its duty to investigate under the Code, as the initial complaints did not specifically allege discrimination on Code grounds.

The application was dismissed.

Miraglia v. University of Waterloo, 2010 HRTO 1459

Brian Cook

Deferred human rights application reactivated after applicant withdrew the related union grievance.

The applicant filed a Request for Order During Proceedings to reactivate her human rights application, which had been deferred pending the completion of a related grievance process.

The applicant provided evidence that she had withdrawn the grievance.

The respondents opposed the reactivation, arguing the grievance process was the appropriate forum.

The Tribunal found that since the grievance was withdrawn, there was no longer any reason to defer the application.

The request was granted, and the respondents were directed to file a response.

Marlene Larivière v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services, Peter Buglass and Neil Neville, 2010 HRTO 1375

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to provide respondent's contact information.

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

The Tribunal was unable to deliver the Notice of Application to the respondent at the provided address.

After the applicant failed to respond to the Tribunal's correspondence and email requesting further contact information, the application was deemed abandoned and dismissed.

Lacey Gerber v. Barbara Durlak, 2010 HRTO 1374

Brian Cook

Reconsideration denied; meeting with hospital CEO did not extend limitation period for alleged discriminatory remark.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his human rights application for being filed outside the one-year limitation period.

The applicant argued that a meeting with the hospital CEO in October 2009 constituted the last incident in a series, bringing his application within the time limit.

The Tribunal found that the alleged discriminatory incident occurred in November 2007, and the subsequent meeting with the CEO was not part of a series of discriminatory incidents.

The request for reconsideration was denied as the applicant failed to meet the criteria under Rule 26.5.

Hall v. Royal Victoria Hospital, 2010 HRTO 1373

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 16, 2010

Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction over federal agency and out-of-province school board.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination by a British Columbia school board and the Canada Pension Plan.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

The Tribunal found it had no jurisdiction over the Canada Pension Plan, which is a federal agency, nor over a school board in British Columbia.

The application was dismissed.

Sandra Glover v. Canada Pension Plan and School District 36, Surrey British Columbia, 2010 HRTO 1364

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 15, 2010

Respondents given final deadline to file Response to human rights application before Tribunal proceeds without them.

The applicant filed a human rights application.

The respondents failed to file a Response within the required 35-day period.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision warning the respondents that failure to participate could lead to orders against them without their participation.

The respondents were given a final deadline of July 5, 2010 to file their Responses along with an explanation for the delay, failing which the Tribunal may proceed without further notice.

M.K. v. W[…]’s Diner, 2010 HRTO 1358

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

George Vuicic

11 cases2000–2017

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 30, 2010

Human rights application dismissed; temporary worker's contract terminated due to argumentative behaviour, not place of origin.

The applicant, who self-identifies as European and speaks with an accent, claimed she was treated dismissively and terminated for discriminatory reasons.

The application was dismissed as there was no evidence to support the allegation of discrimination.

Beata Philip v. United Way/Centraide Ottawa, 2010 HRTO 1774

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 27, 2010

Tribunal schedules oral hearing to determine if delay in filing human rights application was in good faith.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the grounds of disability and age, more than one year after the last alleged incident.

The respondent requested dismissal due to delay, arguing lack of good faith and substantial prejudice.

Andrew Langlois v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2010 HRTO 1778

Brian Cook

Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the respondent is a federal entity.

The applicant filed an application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code alleging discrimination by the Board of Referees, which was established under the federal Employment Insurance Act.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

The applicant argued the Board was independent of the federal government.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the Board of Referees falls under federal jurisdiction and is not subject to the Ontario Human Rights Code.

Andrei Starostenko v. Board of Referees, 2010 HRTO 1743

Brian Cook

In Private Practice14 cases2009–2023

Human rights application deferred pending completion of concurrent union grievance arbitration.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination on the ground of disability.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer because the applicant's union had filed a grievance based on the same facts and issues.

The applicant opposed deferral, expressing lack of confidence in the grievance process.

Starostenko v. InterContinental Yorkville Hotel, 2010 HRTO 1742

Mary Catherine Chambers

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 13, 2010

Human rights application dismissed after applicant failed to attend hearing and provided no evidence of discrimination.

The applicant alleged discrimination on the basis of race, colour, place of origin, disability, and creed after being denied admission to a university program.

The applicant failed to attend the scheduled hearing.

Brown v. Seven Generations Education Institute, 2010 HRTO 1684

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 6, 2010

Human rights application dismissed as applicant failed to establish a factual basis for discrimination allegations.

The applicant alleged discrimination on various Code grounds after being told he was no longer welcome as a member of the respondent organization.

The Tribunal concluded the disputes arose from personality clashes and political differences, not Code-protected grounds, and dismissed the application.

Mesfin Yikuno v. Unity for Human Rights and Democracy, 2010 HRTO 1611

Cathy Baker

1 case2010–2010

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 22, 2010

Reconsideration granted to allow application against union to proceed, as previous dismissal grounds only applied to employer.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his human rights application against both his employer and his union.

The original dismissal was based on section 53(8) of the Human Rights Code, as the subject matter was substantially the same as a complaint previously filed with the Human Rights Commission.

However, the Commission complaint only named the employer, not the union.

The Tribunal granted the reconsideration request with respect to the union, finding that the section 53(8) bar did not apply to it.

A teleconference hearing was scheduled to address the union's arguments that the application against it should be dismissed for delay and failure to disclose a prima facie case.

Prescod v. National Steel Car, 2010 HRTO 1586

Geoff Laplante

3 cases2010–2022

Brian Cook

Employer ordered to pay $13,600 after terminating employee shortly after she disclosed her pregnancy.

The applicant alleged that her employment as a Customer Service Representative was terminated because she disclosed she was pregnant, contrary to the Human Rights Code.

The respondents claimed she was terminated due to performance issues, specifically slowness and speaking too softly.

The Tribunal awarded the applicant $3,600 for wage loss and $10,000 for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect.

Jessie Guay v. 1481979 Ontario Inc. and Michael Angst, 2010 HRTO 1563

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed as it was filed outside the one-year limitation period without explanation.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of place of origin, stating he was laid off on January 30, 2009.

The application was filed on February 23, 2010, more than one year after the last alleged discriminatory event.

The Tribunal requested submissions explaining the delay and how the allegations fell within the Code, but none were received.

The Tribunal dismissed the application as it was filed outside the one-year limitation period under section 34 of the Code and there was no basis to conclude the delay was incurred in good faith.

Bogdan Jarocki v. Custom Wood Fabricating, 2010 HRTO 1511

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 15, 2010

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

The applicant filed an application with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario and later advised that he was negotiating a resolution with the respondent.

The Tribunal requested an update on the status of the application and warned that failure to respond could result in dismissal for abandonment.

The applicant failed to respond by the deadline.

The Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Brian Richards-Kajanto v. Marie Potvin, 2010 HRTO 1534

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 9, 2010

Request to proceed with human rights application granted following conclusion of related WSIAT proceeding.

The applicant filed a request to proceed with their human rights application following the conclusion of a related proceeding before the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal (WSIAT).

The respondent did not reply to the request.

The Tribunal granted the request to proceed and directed the Registrar to schedule the matter for mediation, as both parties had agreed to try mediation.

Yinong Cui v. MSM, a division of Magna Powertrain Inc., 2010 HRTO 1503

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 8, 2010

Respondents given final extension to file response to human rights application before proceeding without them.

The applicant filed a human rights application.

The respondents failed to file a response within the required 35-day period.

Deeks v. Brantford Comfort Inn, 2010 HRTO 1498

Brian Cook

Personal respondents removed from human rights application where corporate respondent was vicariously liable for policy enforcement.

The respondents brought a request for an order during proceedings to remove the personal respondents, arguing they were acting in the normal course of their employment.

The Tribunal applied the established factors for removing personal respondents, noting that the corporate respondent was vicariously liable.

Finding no compelling reason to keep the personal respondents in the proceeding, the Tribunal granted the request and removed them.

Kropf v. Grand River Hospital, 2010 HRTO 1478

Brian Cook

Practising Law - Employed18 cases2010–2016

Human rights application deferred pending completion of concurrent union grievance proceeding.

The applicant filed a human rights application that overlapped with an ongoing union grievance proceeding.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer.

The respondent requested deferral, while the applicant did not respond.

Grosman v. Providence Care Mental Health Services, 2010 HRTO 1474

Christopher Riggs

7 cases2003–2010

Christian Vernon

Andrew Pinto

30 cases1997–2019

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 5, 2010

Application alleging sex discrimination in university promotion and salary, and failure to investigate, dismissed.

The applicant, a university professor, alleged discrimination in employment on the basis of sex.

The Tribunal found that while the applicant experienced difficulties in her promotion process, there was no evidence that these difficulties or her salary differential were due to her sex.

The Tribunal also found that the university did not breach its duty to investigate under the Code, as the initial complaints did not specifically allege discrimination on Code grounds.

The application was dismissed.

Miraglia v. University of Waterloo, 2010 HRTO 1459

Brian Cook

Deferred human rights application reactivated after applicant withdrew the related union grievance.

The applicant filed a Request for Order During Proceedings to reactivate her human rights application, which had been deferred pending the completion of a related grievance process.

The applicant provided evidence that she had withdrawn the grievance.

The respondents opposed the reactivation, arguing the grievance process was the appropriate forum.

The Tribunal found that since the grievance was withdrawn, there was no longer any reason to defer the application.

The request was granted, and the respondents were directed to file a response.

Marlene Larivière v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services, Peter Buglass and Neil Neville, 2010 HRTO 1375

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to provide respondent's contact information.

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

The Tribunal was unable to deliver the Notice of Application to the respondent at the provided address.

After the applicant failed to respond to the Tribunal's correspondence and email requesting further contact information, the application was deemed abandoned and dismissed.

Lacey Gerber v. Barbara Durlak, 2010 HRTO 1374

Brian Cook

Reconsideration denied; meeting with hospital CEO did not extend limitation period for alleged discriminatory remark.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his human rights application for being filed outside the one-year limitation period.

The applicant argued that a meeting with the hospital CEO in October 2009 constituted the last incident in a series, bringing his application within the time limit.

The Tribunal found that the alleged discriminatory incident occurred in November 2007, and the subsequent meeting with the CEO was not part of a series of discriminatory incidents.

The request for reconsideration was denied as the applicant failed to meet the criteria under Rule 26.5.

Hall v. Royal Victoria Hospital, 2010 HRTO 1373

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 16, 2010

Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction over federal agency and out-of-province school board.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination by a British Columbia school board and the Canada Pension Plan.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

The Tribunal found it had no jurisdiction over the Canada Pension Plan, which is a federal agency, nor over a school board in British Columbia.

The application was dismissed.

Sandra Glover v. Canada Pension Plan and School District 36, Surrey British Columbia, 2010 HRTO 1364

Brian Cook