Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 15, 2010

Union granted intervener status; human rights application deferred pending resolution of related grievance.

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

The applicant's union requested to intervene, which was granted as it represented the applicant in ongoing grievances arising from the same facts.

The respondent requested that the application be deferred pending the resolution of the grievance.

The Tribunal found that the issues in the application and the grievance were the same and ordered the deferral of the application pending the conclusion of the grievance.

Christine Greenley v. Rouge Valley Health System, 2010 HRTO 1340

Brian Cook

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent WSIB proceedings.

The respondent requested that the human rights application be dismissed under section 45.1 of the Human Rights Code, arguing that the substance of the application had been dealt with by the WSIB.

Alternatively, the respondent sought deferral of the application pending the conclusion of the WSIB proceedings.

The Tribunal found that the WSIB had not dealt with the substance of the human rights complaint regarding the applicant's layoff.

However, because the WSIB proceedings raised directly relevant issues, the Tribunal deferred the application until the WSIB Appeals Branch concluded its process.

Masotti v. Bardon Supplies Limited, 2010 HRTO 1336

Brian Cook

Deferred human rights application reactivated after union refused to pursue grievance.

The applicant filed a Request for Order During Proceedings to reactivate his human rights application, which had been deferred pending the outcome of a union grievance.

The union ultimately refused to pursue the grievance.

The respondent opposed reactivation, arguing the request was out of time.

The Tribunal found the request was filed within 60 days of the union confirming it would not pursue the grievance, and ordered the application reactivated.

Jim Hatton v. John Pollock, 2010 HRTO 1335

Brian Cook

Request to re-activate deferred human rights application denied as an improper reconsideration request.

The applicant filed a Request for Order During Proceedings asking that her deferred human rights application be re-activated.

The Tribunal had previously deferred the application pending the resolution of a civil action.

The Tribunal treated the request as a request for reconsideration and denied it, noting the only reason offered was that the applicant had made arrangements to attend a previously cancelled hearing date.

Ilze Berzins v. Ottawa Police Services Board, 2010 HRTO 1333

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed due to 15-year delay without a good faith explanation.

The applicant filed a human rights application in 2010 regarding the termination of his employment in 1994.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss due to the 15-year delay.

The applicant submitted that the delay was caused by his pursuit of other avenues to resolve the matter.

The Tribunal found that pursuing other avenues is not a good faith reason for delay, and that a 15-year delay would necessarily result in substantial prejudice to the respondent.

The application was dismissed.

Kirk Cain v. City of Toronto, 2010 HRTO 1176

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed as out of time; pursuing internal complaints does not justify delay.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging age discrimination based on a comment made by a doctor treating his late wife.

The application was filed more than two years after the incident.

The applicant argued the delay was incurred in good faith because he was pursuing an internal complaint with the hospital's CEO.

The Tribunal found that waiting for the outcome of other processes does not justify a delay in making inquiries about Code remedies or timelines.

The application was dismissed as out of time.

Hall v. Royal Victoria Hospital, 2010 HRTO 1165

Brian Cook

Respondents ordered to file a complete Form 2 Response within 5 days or face consequences.

The applicant filed an Application alleging discrimination in employment on the grounds of disability.

The corporate respondent filed a narrative 'Position Statement' instead of the required Form 2 Response.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Incomplete Response, but the respondents still failed to file the proper form.

The Tribunal ordered the respondents to file a complete Response in Form 2 within 5 days, warning that failure to comply could trigger significant consequences under Rule 5.5.

Anderson v. Movie Gallery Store, 2010 HRTO 1162

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant advised he did not wish to pursue it.

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

After the Tribunal Registrar sought direction on whether the applicant wished to pursue the application, the applicant advised by email that he did not wish to pursue it.

The Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Yan Ming Wei v. Diamondback Dairy Farm and Jean-Charles Landry, 2010 HRTO 1161

Brian Cook

Requests to add unrelated respondents and for premature document production denied.

The applicant filed a Request for Order During Proceedings and a Request for a Tribunal Ordered Inquiry, seeking to add another respondent and obtain document production.

The Tribunal denied the requests, finding that the proposed respondents had no connection to the allegations against York University.

The Tribunal also held that the request for document production was premature, as the procedures under Rule 16 are triggered only when a Confirmation of Hearing is issued.

States v. York University, 2010 HRTO 1160

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 18, 2010

Reconsideration of accommodation decision denied as respondent merely sought to re-argue the case.

The corporate respondent requested reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that found it failed to properly accommodate the applicant's work-related injury.

The respondent argued the Tribunal applied the wrong test, ignored evidence, and improperly bifurcated the hearing.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding the submissions amounted to re-arguing the case and did not establish a conflict with established jurisprudence or meet the criteria for reconsideration under Rule 26.

Boyce v. Toronto Community Housing Corporation, 2010 HRTO 1110

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 14, 2010

Tribunal directed respondents to file a full Response to determine if application should be deferred.

The applicant filed a human rights application against the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board and an Appeals Resolution Officer.

The Tribunal considered whether to defer the application because the applicant was pursuing an appeal of the WSIB decision.

Finding that further information was required about the status of the WSIB appeal, the Tribunal directed the respondents to file a full Response including information on the appeal's status.

Galas v. Workplace Safety and Insurance Board, 2010 HRTO 1082

Brian Cook

Tribunal assumes jurisdiction over disability discrimination claim; application found timely as filed within one year.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability after she was not offered a job in Ontario following a work-related injury in Alberta.

The respondents challenged the Tribunal's jurisdiction, arguing the events occurred in Alberta and the application was out of time.

The Tribunal found it had jurisdiction over the allegations relating to the applicant's involvement with the respondents in Ontario and that the application was filed within one year of the last incident in the series of events.

The matter was directed to proceed to mediation or a hearing.

Melody Kovacs v. Pitney Bowes Inc., 2010 HRTO 1067

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to attend mediation or respond.

The applicant filed an application under the Human Rights Code but failed to attend a rescheduled mediation session.

The Tribunal attempted to contact the applicant, warning that the application would be deemed abandoned if no response was received.

The applicant did not respond.

The Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Stewart v. Koenraads, 2010 HRTO 1059

Brian Cook

Human rights application allowed to proceed past preliminary stage despite being filed outside one-year limitation period.

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

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss for delay.

The applicant submitted medical reports indicating he was too disabled to file earlier.

The Tribunal held it was not plain and obvious that the delay was not incurred in good faith, and directed that the application be processed and served on the respondent, without making a final determination on the timeliness issue.

Langlois v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2010 HRTO 1072

Brian Cook

Human rights application deferred pending outcome of concurrent WSIB proceedings regarding the same workplace injuries.

The applicant requested that the Tribunal defer consideration of her human rights application pending the outcome of her concurrent Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) claims regarding the same events.

The respondents opposed the deferral, arguing the proceedings involved different legal theories and noting they had already incurred mediation costs.

The Tribunal granted the deferral, finding a clear overlap between the issues and potential damages in the two proceedings, and noted that the extent of WSIB compensation would be relevant if the human rights application later proceeded.

A.B. v. Joe Singer Shoes Limited, 2010 HRTO 1053

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to confirm intention to proceed.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on the ground of colour.

After mediation failed, a hearing was scheduled.

The respondents requested the application be dismissed as abandoned because the applicant had not filed any documents.

The Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction requiring the applicant to confirm his intention to appear at the hearing.

The applicant failed to provide written confirmation.

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

Bertram Jones v. Ontario Steel Haulers Inc. and Barry Sonshine, 2010 HRTO 1050

Brian Cook

Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as family custody dispute did not engage protected social areas.

The applicant filed an application against her adopted mother concerning conduct related to the custody of the applicant's daughter.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss as the application did not appear to allege discrimination in a protected area under the Human Rights Code.

The applicant argued the area of housing applied because the alleged discrimination was partly based on her living in a low-income neighbourhood.

The Tribunal concluded it lacked jurisdiction to deal with allegations outside the areas set out in the Code and dismissed the application.

Sharma Sugarman v. Noreen Sugarman, 2010 HRTO 1049

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 26, 2010

Human rights application deferred pending the conclusion of a concurrent Employment Standards Act proceeding.

The applicant filed an application under the Human Rights Code.

At the scheduled hearing, the respondents failed to appear, and their representative requested an adjournment.

The Tribunal noted that the parties were involved in an ongoing related proceeding under the Employment Standards Act regarding severance pay, which was scheduled for a hearing before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

Finding that the concurrent proceeding raised the same factual issues regarding the termination of the applicant's employment, the Tribunal deferred further consideration of the human rights application until the conclusion of the Employment Standards Act process to avoid inconsistent decisions.

Mullings v. Global Alliance Worldwide Chauffeured Services Ltd., 2010 HRTO 895

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 21, 2010

Request to reactivate deferred application denied as parallel grievance process was still ongoing.

The applicant requested to reactivate her human rights application, which had been deferred pending an ongoing grievance procedure.

She argued that the grievance process was excessively delayed, as she had not worked since December 2008.

The respondent opposed the request, noting that an arbitrator had been selected and an Independent Medical Examination scheduled.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding that the grievance process was still continuing and the arbitrator would have the power to deal with the issues raised in the application.

Kim Lalonde v. OMNI Healthcare Limited Partnership, 2010 HRTO 869

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 14, 2010

Requests to reactivate deferred application and compel disclosure denied as premature pending related civil action.

The applicant filed Requests for Order During Proceedings seeking to reactivate her human rights application and compel disclosure from the respondent.

The Tribunal had previously deferred the application pending the resolution of a related civil action.

Finding no new information to justify reconsidering the deferral, the Tribunal denied the request to reactivate and found the disclosure request premature.

Berzins v. Ottawa Police Services Board, 2010 HRTO 827

Applicant

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

counsel

Justin McLartyCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel

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

Counsel for Human Resources Professional Association and Rebecca Durcan

Erica RichlerCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for Loblaw Companies Limited

McLean WoodCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for Ontario College of Nurses, Proposed Respondent

Prya MorleyCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for Ontario Lottery and Gaming Commission

David RossCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Respondents

Paul RochfordCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the respondent United Steelworkers, Local 7135

Cathy BakerCounsel
1 appearance

for Alana Miller

Mark EllisCounsel
1 appearance

for AuRico Gold Inc.

Michael TorranceCounsel
1 appearance

for Carillion Services Inc.

Daniel ShieldsCounsel
1 appearance

for Caroline Roncadin

Amanda SmallwoodCounsel
1 appearance

for CAW

Anthony DaleCounsel
1 appearance

for Chrysler Canada

Clifford HartCounsel
1 appearance

for Complex Services Inc.

Paul PingueCounsel
1 appearance

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

Lonny RosenCounsel
2 appearances

for Corrine Long

Raj AnandCounsel
1 appearance

for CUPE

Ryan GoldvineUnion representative
1 appearance
Susan BallantyneCounsel
1 appearance

for CUPE, Interested party

Fred HoUnion representative
1 appearance

for CUPE Local 3166 and CUPE Local 5200

Elizabeth NurseCounsel
1 appearance

for Deborah DeGroot

Deborah DeGrootSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Delta Bingo Inc.

Sabatina VassalliCounsel
1 appearance

for Dufferin Vacant Land Condominium Corporation No. 22

Michelle KellyCounsel
1 appearance

for F Janzen Drug Limited

Derek ZulianelloCounsel
1 appearance

for Frank Smith

Anna MatasCounsel
1 appearance

for Gomez Sebastian and Tobias Abell

Mahi KeyvaniAgent
1 appearance

for Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario

Anita LyonCounsel
1 appearance

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

Daniel HuffakerCounsel
1 appearance

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

Stuart McMahonCounsel
1 appearance

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

Bruce EllisCounsel
1 appearance

for herself

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

for himself

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

for Honywell Safety Products

Sven PoysaCounsel
1 appearance

for Kinark Child and Family Services

Sabatina VassalliCounsel
2 appearances

for Laird Constructors

Scott ThompsonCounsel
1 appearance

for Loblaw Companies Limited and MacLean Wood

MacLean WoodCounsel
1 appearance

for Mahdi Keyvani

Mahdi KeyvaniSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Margaret De Wit

Self-representedSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Marty Burke

Marty BurkeSelf-represented
1 appearance

former representative for the Applicant

Leonard ReeceAgent
1 appearance

for Niagara Hospitality Hotels Inc.

Self-representedSelf-represented
1 appearance

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

Ryan ConlinCounsel
1 appearance

for Ontario Charitable Gaming Association

Michael LiptonCounsel
1 appearance

for Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation

M. David RossCounsel
1 appearance
Tom MoutsatsosCounsel
1 appearance

for Ontario Public Service Employees Union

Hugh O’ReillyCounsel
1 appearance

for OPSEU

David WrightCounsel
1 appearance

for OPSEU Pension Trust

Ari KaplanCounsel
1 appearance

for Petro Canada

Susan MetzlerCounsel
1 appearance

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

Carl PetersonCounsel
1 appearance
Megan BealCounsel
1 appearance

for Scapa Tapes North America

Paula RusakCounsel
1 appearance

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

Katrina PeddleCounsel
1 appearance

for SEIU, Local 1 Canada

Karen WalshUnion representative
1 appearance

for Sheraton Gateway Hotel and Andrew Simmers

Donna D’AndreaCounsel
1 appearance

for Stevens Resource Group Inc.

Elizabeth TraynorCounsel
1 appearance

for St. John's

Lena VartanianCounsel
1 appearance

for the applicant

Glen MorrisonParalegal
1 appearance
Brenda CulbertAgent
1 appearance

for the Applicant

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

for the Applicants

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

for the Canadian Addiction Treatment Centres LP

Peter DudaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Canadian Commercial Workers Industry Pension Plan

Anthony GuindonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 4807

David SteeleCounsel
1 appearance

for the College of Ontario Surgeons of Ontario

Monica TessierCounsel
1 appearance

for the Financial Services Commission of Ontario

Shemin ManjiCounsel
1 appearance

for the Halton Catholic District School Board

Brenda BowlbyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervener

Frank ReynoldsUnion representative
1 appearance

for the Intervenor

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

for the Intervenor York Regional Police Association

Bruce PriceCounsel
1 appearance

for The Law Foundation, Marion Boyd, and Chris Thomas

Elizabeth ForsterCounsel
1 appearance

for The Law Society of Upper Canada and Thomas Conway

Dolores BarbiniCounsel
1 appearance

for the Male Faculty Member

Ross WellsCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ministry of Children and Youth Services

Cheryl EllisonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services

Stewart McMahonCounsel
1 appearance

for the numbered company

Jeffery KerbelAgent
1 appearance

for the Office of the Independent Police Review Director, Respondent

Lynette D’SouzaCounsel
1 appearance

for the organizational respondent and the other personal respondents

Douglas AbrahamCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed intervenor

Melissa KronickCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed Personal Respondent

Simon-Pierre PaquetteCounsel
1 appearance

for the proposed respondent

Heather AldenUnion representative
1 appearance

for the Proposed Respondent

Kylie Crawford Ten BrookCounsel
1 appearance
Daryl CukiermanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent

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

for the Respondent 1243564 Ontario Limited

Kathleen AndrewCounsel
1 appearance

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

Kathleen AndrewCounsel
1 appearance

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

Gavin LeebCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent CAW

Anthony DaleCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Chrysler Canada

Clifford HartCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Chrysler Canada Inc.

Cliff HartCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent City of Hamilton

Brenda GloverCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent, Clint Williams

Thomas SargeantAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Francisco José De Andrade

Francisco José De AndradeSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent Hamilton Niagara Haldimand Brant Community Care Access Centre

Katharine ByrickCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Hamilton Police Association

Joshua PhillipsCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Hamilton Police Services Board

Marco VisentiniCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Henry Rivas

Crista ReaCounsel
2 appearances

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

Fatema DadaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Hotel Dieu Grace Hospital

Kate DeardenCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Howard Hurwitz

Amanda SmallwoodCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Mary Powell

Susan TothCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Maxine Straker

Maxine StrakerSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent Michael Rogozinsky

Michael RogozinskySelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent ParaMed Home Health Care

Shikha SharmaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Pomer and Boccia Professional Corporation

David PomerCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent, Prescott Standard Condominium Corporation No. 19

Mitchell RobinsonCounsel
1 appearance

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

Arlen SternbergCounsel
1 appearance

for the respondents

Mr. LaplanteCounsel
1 appearance
Catherine PetersCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents

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

for the Respondents, 2447127 Ontario Inc.

Thomas SchoenleberParalegal
1 appearance

for the Respondents Karim Zahraei and Roghaiyeh Salmani Farmand

Aysan ZahraeiAgent
1 appearance

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

Helen RichardsCounsel
1 appearance

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

Mike NewellUnion representative
1 appearance

for the Respondent, Stevens Resource Group

Elizabeth TraynorCounsel
1 appearance

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

Ryan ConlinCounsel
1 appearance

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

Stephen MaioCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The City of Thunder Bay

M. FricotCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Corporation of the City of Thunder Bay

Mandy FricotCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Regional Municipality of Peel Police Services Board

Paula RuzakCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ticketmaster Canada LP

Stuart SvonkinCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Toronto Electric Model Aviation Club

Simon HinchcliffeAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Toronto Police Services Board

Andrea DenovanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1919

Bradley ChaplickCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2471

Jessica HoffmanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Unifor and its Local 1285

Anthony DaleCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent University Health Network – Toronto Western Hospital

Lee LenkinskiCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Windsor Regional Hospital

Paula TrattnerCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent, Workplace Safety and Insurance Board

Gurjit BrarCounsel
1 appearance

for the Service Employees International Union Canada, Local 1

Mike NewellUnion representative
1 appearance

for the Toronto District School Board

Wendy LopezCounsel
1 appearance

for the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board

Agnes WintersingerAgent
1 appearance
Greg BullenCounsel
1 appearance

for Unifor

Piper HendersonCounsel
1 appearance

for Unifor Local 1106, Karrie Mercier and Bill McLachlan

Kathryn BellCounsel
1 appearance

for United Steelworkers

Shaheen HiraniCounsel
1 appearance

for V.H. Fuels Inc.

Eric AmodeoCounsel
1 appearance

for Vince Kerrio

William HayterCounsel
1 appearance

for York University

Joanna RainbowCounsel
1 appearance

On her own behalf

Catherine ChanSelf-represented
1 appearance

On Her Own Behalf

Houdeh HoushangiSelf-represented
1 appearance

on his own behalf

Gilbert McIntyreSelf-represented
1 appearance

On his own behalf

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

Respondent

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

Respondents

Jinan KubursiCounsel
1 appearance

Self-represented

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

The Applicant

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

The Intervenor

Victor YeeCounsel
1 appearance

The Respondent

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

Peikang DaiCounsel
1 appearance

757

Decisions

Years active

Tribunals

3.6

cases/mo

HRTO706(93%)

OCAT51(7%)

Decision types

motion

648

trial

109

/Adjudicator

Brian Cook — Member

Human Rights

Employment and Labour Law

Administrative Law

Other Tribunals

Real Estate Law

Workplace Safety and Insurance Law

Workers' Compensation

Landlord and Tenant

Health Law

ADR/Mediation Services

Brian Cook

Member·Condominium Authority Tribunal·Since 2008

OCAT HRTO

757

cases · 19 yrs · HRTO, OCAT

Trial

Motion

Costs

Appeal

Sentencing

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

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 15, 2010

Union granted intervener status; human rights application deferred pending resolution of related grievance.

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

The applicant's union requested to intervene, which was granted as it represented the applicant in ongoing grievances arising from the same facts.

The respondent requested that the application be deferred pending the resolution of the grievance.

The Tribunal found that the issues in the application and the grievance were the same and ordered the deferral of the application pending the conclusion of the grievance.

Christine Greenley v. Rouge Valley Health System, 2010 HRTO 1340

Brian Cook

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent WSIB proceedings.

The respondent requested that the human rights application be dismissed under section 45.1 of the Human Rights Code, arguing that the substance of the application had been dealt with by the WSIB.

Alternatively, the respondent sought deferral of the application pending the conclusion of the WSIB proceedings.

The Tribunal found that the WSIB had not dealt with the substance of the human rights complaint regarding the applicant's layoff.

However, because the WSIB proceedings raised directly relevant issues, the Tribunal deferred the application until the WSIB Appeals Branch concluded its process.

Masotti v. Bardon Supplies Limited, 2010 HRTO 1336

Brian Cook

Deferred human rights application reactivated after union refused to pursue grievance.

The applicant filed a Request for Order During Proceedings to reactivate his human rights application, which had been deferred pending the outcome of a union grievance.

The union ultimately refused to pursue the grievance.

The respondent opposed reactivation, arguing the request was out of time.

The Tribunal found the request was filed within 60 days of the union confirming it would not pursue the grievance, and ordered the application reactivated.

Jim Hatton v. John Pollock, 2010 HRTO 1335

Brian Cook

Request to re-activate deferred human rights application denied as an improper reconsideration request.

The applicant filed a Request for Order During Proceedings asking that her deferred human rights application be re-activated.

The Tribunal had previously deferred the application pending the resolution of a civil action.

Ilze Berzins v. Ottawa Police Services Board, 2010 HRTO 1333

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed due to 15-year delay without a good faith explanation.

The applicant filed a human rights application in 2010 regarding the termination of his employment in 1994.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss due to the 15-year delay.

The applicant submitted that the delay was caused by his pursuit of other avenues to resolve the matter.

The Tribunal found that pursuing other avenues is not a good faith reason for delay, and that a 15-year delay would necessarily result in substantial prejudice to the respondent.

The application was dismissed.

Kirk Cain v. City of Toronto, 2010 HRTO 1176

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed as out of time; pursuing internal complaints does not justify delay.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging age discrimination based on a comment made by a doctor treating his late wife.

The application was filed more than two years after the incident.

The applicant argued the delay was incurred in good faith because he was pursuing an internal complaint with the hospital's CEO.

The Tribunal found that waiting for the outcome of other processes does not justify a delay in making inquiries about Code remedies or timelines.

The application was dismissed as out of time.

Hall v. Royal Victoria Hospital, 2010 HRTO 1165

Brian Cook

Respondents ordered to file a complete Form 2 Response within 5 days or face consequences.

The applicant filed an Application alleging discrimination in employment on the grounds of disability.

The corporate respondent filed a narrative 'Position Statement' instead of the required Form 2 Response.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Incomplete Response, but the respondents still failed to file the proper form.

The Tribunal ordered the respondents to file a complete Response in Form 2 within 5 days, warning that failure to comply could trigger significant consequences under Rule 5.5.

Anderson v. Movie Gallery Store, 2010 HRTO 1162

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant advised he did not wish to pursue it.

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

After the Tribunal Registrar sought direction on whether the applicant wished to pursue the application, the applicant advised by email that he did not wish to pursue it.

The Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Yan Ming Wei v. Diamondback Dairy Farm and Jean-Charles Landry, 2010 HRTO 1161

Brian Cook

Requests to add unrelated respondents and for premature document production denied.

The applicant filed a Request for Order During Proceedings and a Request for a Tribunal Ordered Inquiry, seeking to add another respondent and obtain document production.

The Tribunal denied the requests, finding that the proposed respondents had no connection to the allegations against York University.

The Tribunal also held that the request for document production was premature, as the procedures under Rule 16 are triggered only when a Confirmation of Hearing is issued.

States v. York University, 2010 HRTO 1160

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 18, 2010

Reconsideration of accommodation decision denied as respondent merely sought to re-argue the case.

The corporate respondent requested reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that found it failed to properly accommodate the applicant's work-related injury.

The respondent argued the Tribunal applied the wrong test, ignored evidence, and improperly bifurcated the hearing.

Boyce v. Toronto Community Housing Corporation, 2010 HRTO 1110

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 14, 2010

Tribunal directed respondents to file a full Response to determine if application should be deferred.

The applicant filed a human rights application against the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board and an Appeals Resolution Officer.

The Tribunal considered whether to defer the application because the applicant was pursuing an appeal of the WSIB decision.

Finding that further information was required about the status of the WSIB appeal, the Tribunal directed the respondents to file a full Response including information on the appeal's status.

Galas v. Workplace Safety and Insurance Board, 2010 HRTO 1082

Brian Cook

Tribunal assumes jurisdiction over disability discrimination claim; application found timely as filed within one year.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability after she was not offered a job in Ontario following a work-related injury in Alberta.

The respondents challenged the Tribunal's jurisdiction, arguing the events occurred in Alberta and the application was out of time.

The matter was directed to proceed to mediation or a hearing.

Melody Kovacs v. Pitney Bowes Inc., 2010 HRTO 1067

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to attend mediation or respond.

The applicant filed an application under the Human Rights Code but failed to attend a rescheduled mediation session.

The Tribunal attempted to contact the applicant, warning that the application would be deemed abandoned if no response was received.

The applicant did not respond.

The Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Stewart v. Koenraads, 2010 HRTO 1059

Brian Cook

Human rights application allowed to proceed past preliminary stage despite being filed outside one-year limitation period.

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

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss for delay.

The applicant submitted medical reports indicating he was too disabled to file earlier.

Langlois v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2010 HRTO 1072

Brian Cook

Human rights application deferred pending outcome of concurrent WSIB proceedings regarding the same workplace injuries.

The respondents opposed the deferral, arguing the proceedings involved different legal theories and noting they had already incurred mediation costs.

A.B. v. Joe Singer Shoes Limited, 2010 HRTO 1053

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to confirm intention to proceed.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on the ground of colour.

After mediation failed, a hearing was scheduled.

The respondents requested the application be dismissed as abandoned because the applicant had not filed any documents.

The Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction requiring the applicant to confirm his intention to appear at the hearing.

The applicant failed to provide written confirmation.

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

Bertram Jones v. Ontario Steel Haulers Inc. and Barry Sonshine, 2010 HRTO 1050

Brian Cook

Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as family custody dispute did not engage protected social areas.

The applicant filed an application against her adopted mother concerning conduct related to the custody of the applicant's daughter.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss as the application did not appear to allege discrimination in a protected area under the Human Rights Code.

The applicant argued the area of housing applied because the alleged discrimination was partly based on her living in a low-income neighbourhood.

The Tribunal concluded it lacked jurisdiction to deal with allegations outside the areas set out in the Code and dismissed the application.

Sharma Sugarman v. Noreen Sugarman, 2010 HRTO 1049

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 26, 2010

Human rights application deferred pending the conclusion of a concurrent Employment Standards Act proceeding.

The applicant filed an application under the Human Rights Code.

At the scheduled hearing, the respondents failed to appear, and their representative requested an adjournment.

Mullings v. Global Alliance Worldwide Chauffeured Services Ltd., 2010 HRTO 895

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 21, 2010

Request to reactivate deferred application denied as parallel grievance process was still ongoing.

The applicant requested to reactivate her human rights application, which had been deferred pending an ongoing grievance procedure.

She argued that the grievance process was excessively delayed, as she had not worked since December 2008.

The respondent opposed the request, noting that an arbitrator had been selected and an Independent Medical Examination scheduled.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding that the grievance process was still continuing and the arbitrator would have the power to deal with the issues raised in the application.

Kim Lalonde v. OMNI Healthcare Limited Partnership, 2010 HRTO 869

Brian Cook