Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioSep 1, 2017

Respondents ordered to pay outstanding settlement funds and damages for injury to dignity after contravening settlement.

The applicant filed an Application alleging a contravention of settlement under section 45.9 of the Human Rights Code.

The parties had previously settled an application for $4,000, but the respondents' installment cheques were returned for non-sufficient funds.

The respondents did not respond to the Application or attend the hearing.

The Tribunal found the respondents jointly and severally liable for the contravention and ordered them to pay the outstanding $1,000, bank charges, interest, and an additional $1,000 for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect caused by the breach.

Smith v. 2144174 Ontario Inc., 2017 HRTO 1132

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 30, 2017

Human rights application deferred pending resolution of related ongoing criminal charges against the applicant.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination by the respondent Children's Aid Society.

The respondent requested a summary hearing or, in the alternative, that the application be deferred due to ongoing criminal charges against the applicant relating to the allegations.

The Tribunal deferred the application until the conclusion of the related court proceedings to ensure the applicant's rights in the criminal matter are not compromised.

Ebonei Wynn v. Windsor Essex Children’s Aid Society, 2017 HRTO 1118

Applications for contravention of settlement dismissed as respondents made best efforts to accommodate home care preferences.

The applicant filed applications alleging that the respondents contravened Minutes of Settlement by failing to use best efforts to provide home care services in accordance with her preferences, specifically for a non-smoking Filipina personal support worker available on Sunday mornings.

Following the withdrawal of the applicant's long-time worker, the respondents faced difficulties finding a suitable replacement due to the applicant's extensive 'do not send' list and her refusal to consider alternative agencies.

The Tribunal found that the respondents had made best efforts and did not contravene the settlement, dismissing the applications.

Hasselsjo v. ParaMed Home Health Care, 2017 HRTO 1103

Paul O’Ryan

Practising Law - Employed24 cases2010–2018

Dianne Jozefacki

Brian Cook

Tribunal partially dismisses human rights application due to prior grievance and lack of reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant, a school custodian, alleged discrimination based on sex, creed, and race regarding workplace conflict, scheduling, religious leave, and school inspections.

Following a preliminary hearing, the Tribunal confirmed the union's intervenor status over the applicant's objection.

The Tribunal dismissed the religious leave allegation as having no reasonable prospect of success and dismissed the school inspection allegations under section 45.1 of the Code because they had been dealt with in a prior grievance.

The Tribunal also denied the applicant's request to amend the application to include events outside the one-year limitation period.

The allegations regarding workplace conflict and scheduling were permitted to proceed.

Mekhail v. Dufferin Peel Catholic District School Board, 2017 HRTO 1098

Greg Bullen

50 cases2009–2019

Brian Cook

Practising Law - Employed30 cases2017–2026

Application alleging age discrimination in WSIB hearing loss policy dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

The applicant alleged age discrimination after the WSIB reduced his noise-induced hearing loss calculation based on a policy that deducts 0.5 decibels for each year a worker's age exceeds 60.

The Tribunal dismissed the application for lack of jurisdiction, finding that section 2.1(1) of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997 explicitly exempts WSIB policies requiring or authorizing age distinctions from the application of the Human Rights Code.

Tozer v. Workplace Safety Insurance Board, 2017 HRTO 1097

Adrien Iafrate

Brian Cook

In Private Practice14 cases2014–2026

Summary hearing to dismiss human rights applications denied due to factual disputes requiring evidence.

The applicants, who self-identify as Metis and as persons with disabilities, alleged discrimination regarding their treatment while incarcerated at the Niagara Detention Centre.

They alleged denial of prescribed medications, placement in segregation after being assaulted, and denial of access to cultural and creed-based traditions, including sacred medicines and appropriate meals.

The respondent denied the allegations, asserting the complaints related to non-Code factors like under-staffing and over-crowding, and disputed the factual claims.

The Tribunal declined to dismiss the applications at the summary hearing stage, finding that the factual disagreements required evidence to resolve, and directed the applications to continue in the Tribunal's process.

Moore v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2017 HRTO 1082

Sabatina Vassalli

Lonny Rosen

In Private Practice14 cases2005–2025

Ella Venhola

2 cases2017–2017

Cheryl Ellison

Practising Law - Employed33 cases2007–2025

Amanda Smallwood

10 cases2013–2026

Brian Cook

Tribunal refuses to dismiss human rights application under s. 45.1, finding clinical review mechanism did not address discrimination.

The applicant, a child with Autism Spectrum Disorder, alleged discrimination regarding his discharge from IBI therapy provided by Kinark.

Following a preliminary hearing, the Tribunal dismissed the application against the Ministry of Children and Youth Services, finding no reasonable prospect of success for holding the funder vicariously liable.

The Tribunal ruled that historical treatment allegations were untimely for remedial purposes but could be introduced as context.

The Tribunal also held that the Independent Review Mechanism (IRM) process, which upheld the clinical discharge decision, did not appropriately deal with the substance of the human rights application under section 45.1 of the Code, as it was a clinical review rather than a legal one.

The applicant was directed to clarify the specific allegations against the IRM reviewer and coordinator.

A.T. v. Kinark Child and Family Services, 2017 HRTO 1081

Nicholas Ellegood

2 cases2016–2017

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 27, 2017

Summary hearing dismissal denied; discrimination application regarding retail store interaction to proceed.

The applicant, a Black woman with a disability who uses a wheelchair, alleged discrimination in retail services after an interaction at the respondent's store where an Assistant Manager threatened to call the police.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application had no reasonable prospect of success.

Finding differing accounts of the interaction between the parties, the Tribunal concluded the application could not be dismissed at this stage and directed the respondent to file a Response.

Joan Powell v. Best Buy Canada, 2017 HRTO 956

Roy Filion

55 cases1987–2019

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 25, 2017

Summary hearing to dismiss human rights applications denied; request to amend applications granted.

The applicant brought human rights applications on behalf of herself and her child, alleging discrimination in education services by the school board and personal respondents.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing by telephone to determine whether the applications should be dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success, and to address requests to amend the applications and remove the personal respondents.

The Tribunal found that the allegations depended on context and evidence, and therefore could not be dismissed at this stage.

The Tribunal granted the request to amend the applications and deferred the issue of removing the personal respondents to the hearing adjudicator.

N.W. v. Peel District School Board, 2017 HRTO 943

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioDec 29, 2016

Human rights application alleging age discrimination and reprisal dismissed due to bad faith and interpersonal conflict.

The applicant, a volunteer Chief Flight Instructor at a model aviation club, alleged discrimination on the basis of age and reprisal after being asked to step down from his position.

The respondents claimed the decision was due to significant interpersonal conflict caused by the applicant, not his age, although an email sent to the applicant cited a desire to promote younger members.

The Tribunal found that the email's reference to age was a pretext to avoid addressing the conflict, and that the applicant knew age was not the real reason.

The Tribunal dismissed the age discrimination claim.

The Tribunal also dismissed the reprisal claim regarding internet forum posts made by the personal respondent, finding that the applicant's allegation of age discrimination was not made in good faith, and therefore he was not entitled to protection under section 8 of the Human Rights Code.

Murray v. Toronto Electric Model Aviation Club, 2016 HRTO 1692

Hera Evans

Practising Law - Employed24 cases2014–2026

Brian Cook

In Private Practice4 cases2010–2026

Most reprisal allegations dismissed at summary hearing; one threat of segregation allowed to proceed.

The applicant, an inmate, filed three applications alleging reprisal under section 8 of the Human Rights Code against correctional staff.

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

The Tribunal dismissed two applications entirely, finding no evidence linking the alleged actions (an assault and a requirement to take medication with water) to the applicant's attempts to enforce his Code rights.

The third application was dismissed except for one allegation that a Sergeant threatened to place the applicant in segregation if he made another complaint to the Tribunal, which was allowed to proceed.

Mazia v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2016 HRTO 1678

Arif Raza

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed at summary hearing for having no reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant alleged discrimination, harassment, and reprisal on the grounds of creed and marital status against a mosque and associated individuals.

The applicant claimed he experienced unpleasant looks and false rumours in the mosque's neighbourhood.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing and dismissed the application, concluding there was no reasonable prospect the applicant could prove his allegations under the Human Rights Code.

Amir Hussain v. Madina Mosque and Skinder Khan, 2016 HRTO 1675

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioDec 16, 2016

Request for reconsideration of summary dismissal denied as applicant failed to meet Rule 26.5 criteria.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his application following a summary hearing.

The applicant argued he should have been allowed to present his entire case, alleged the Tribunal applied a different standard because he is Black, and objected to not being provided with legal counsel.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's disagreement with the summary hearing process and the outcome was not a sufficient reason for reconsideration under Rule 26.5.

The request for reconsideration was denied.

Borden v. York University, 2016 HRTO 1622

Prya Morley

1 case2016–2016

Erica Richler

In Private Practice266 cases2008–2026

Brian Cook

In Private Practice2 cases2015–2016

Human rights application against professional association dismissed as barred by statutory immunity and evidentiary restrictions.

The applicant, a nurse whose license was suspended by the Ontario College of Nurses, filed a human rights application against the Human Resources Professional Association (HRPA) and its counsel, alleging discrimination and reprisal.

The HRPA had disciplined the applicant for failing to disclose the College's finding on her annual information return.

The Tribunal held a preliminary hearing and dismissed the application.

The Tribunal found that sections 65 and 66 of the Registered Human Resources Professionals Act barred the proceeding absent bad faith, which was not alleged, and prevented the admission of necessary evidence.

The Tribunal also denied the applicant's request to add the College as a respondent because those allegations had been dismissed in a previous application.

Judith Pidgeon v. Human Resources Professional Association, 2016 HRTO 1607

Anthony Lungu

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed due to late reactivation request and prior OLRB finding on termination.

The applicant sought to reactivate a human rights application that had been deferred pending an Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB) proceeding regarding his termination.

The reactivation request was filed past the 60-day deadline, and the applicant's paralegal failed to provide sufficient medical evidence to justify the delay.

The Tribunal denied the request to reactivate.

In the alternative, the Tribunal held that the application would be dismissed under section 45.1 of the Human Rights Code because the OLRB had already determined that the sole cause of the applicant's termination was wilful misconduct, thereby precluding the human rights claims.

Allegations regarding earlier discriminatory comments were also dismissed as being out of time.

Jaswinder Ahluwalia v. Plastic Dress Up Ltd., 2016 HRTO 1603

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioDec 2, 2016

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Case Assessment Direction.

The applicant filed an application with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario but also commenced a civil action seeking an order for an alleged infringement of her rights under the Code.

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

The applicant failed to make submissions or contact the Tribunal.

Consequently, the application was dismissed as abandoned and the scheduled hearing was cancelled.

Maria Elisa Cruz Tarnate v. Medrehab Group Inc., 2016 HRTO 1546

Dianne Jozefacki

Brian Cook

Tribunal allows human rights application to proceed, finding it is not barred by a prior release.

The applicant, who requires a power wheelchair, alleged discrimination with respect to services because of disability.

The respondent requested the application be dismissed, arguing it was barred by a prior settlement and release, and alternatively had no reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal found the release did not bar the application because the allegations concerned a conversation that occurred after the release was signed.

The Tribunal also declined to dismiss the application for having no reasonable prospect of success, as the allegations of demeaning treatment based on disability could constitute a Code infringement if proven.

The Tribunal directed the matter to mediation.

Daugherty v. Shoppers Home Health Care Canada Inc., 2016 HRTO 1484

Brian Cook

Not Practising Law23 cases2010–2017

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

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal in employment, claiming he was terminated after complaining about racial profiling.

The respondent requested that the application be deferred because the applicant had filed concurrent grievances under a collective agreement based on the same facts.

The Tribunal granted the request and deferred the application, noting its usual practice to defer when a concurrent grievance proceeding is underway, while allowing the applicant to request reactivation if the grievance process is unduly delayed.

Cox v. The Woodbridge Group (Foam), 2016 HRTO 1482

Indira Sawh

Brian Cook

Summary hearing request to dismiss inmate's discrimination application regarding medical treatment and protective custody denied.

The applicant, an inmate, alleged discrimination based on disability regarding the denial of necessary medications and his placement in protective custody.

The respondent requested a summary hearing to dismiss the application for having no reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal found that while medical judgments are generally outside its jurisdiction, the applicant's claim that institutional policies regarding medication abuse influenced the decision raised an accommodation issue.

The Tribunal also found the protective custody allegations required further evidence.

The request to dismiss the application was denied.

Kift v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2016 HRTO 1463

Joanna Rainbow

16 cases2010–2016

Bruce Ellis

25 cases2005–2023

Brian Cook

Employment and Labour Law

Human rights application alleging student loans and tuition fees are discriminatory dismissed at summary hearing.

The applicant alleged discrimination on the basis of race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, ethnic origin, and creed, arguing that tuition fees and interest-bearing student loans are discriminatory against descendants of slaves.

He sought free tuition or interest-free loans, claiming that paying interest violated his religious beliefs.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing and dismissed the application as having no reasonable prospect of success, finding that financial assistance is based on financial need rather than Code-protected grounds, and that the applicant failed to provide objective evidence linking his objection to interest to a specific religion.

Borden v. York University, 2016 HRTO 1449

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

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioSep 1, 2017

Respondents ordered to pay outstanding settlement funds and damages for injury to dignity after contravening settlement.

The applicant filed an Application alleging a contravention of settlement under section 45.9 of the Human Rights Code.

The parties had previously settled an application for $4,000, but the respondents' installment cheques were returned for non-sufficient funds.

The respondents did not respond to the Application or attend the hearing.

Smith v. 2144174 Ontario Inc., 2017 HRTO 1132

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 30, 2017

Human rights application deferred pending resolution of related ongoing criminal charges against the applicant.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination by the respondent Children's Aid Society.

The respondent requested a summary hearing or, in the alternative, that the application be deferred due to ongoing criminal charges against the applicant relating to the allegations.

The Tribunal deferred the application until the conclusion of the related court proceedings to ensure the applicant's rights in the criminal matter are not compromised.

Ebonei Wynn v. Windsor Essex Children’s Aid Society, 2017 HRTO 1118

Shikha Sharma

In Private Practice10 cases2016–2021

Katharine Byrick

10 cases2011–2024

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 25, 2017

Applications for contravention of settlement dismissed as respondents made best efforts to accommodate home care preferences.

The Tribunal found that the respondents had made best efforts and did not contravene the settlement, dismissing the applications.

Hasselsjo v. ParaMed Home Health Care, 2017 HRTO 1103

Paul O’Ryan

Practising Law - Employed24 cases2010–2018

Dianne Jozefacki

Brian Cook

Tribunal partially dismisses human rights application due to prior grievance and lack of reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant, a school custodian, alleged discrimination based on sex, creed, and race regarding workplace conflict, scheduling, religious leave, and school inspections.

Following a preliminary hearing, the Tribunal confirmed the union's intervenor status over the applicant's objection.

The Tribunal also denied the applicant's request to amend the application to include events outside the one-year limitation period.

The allegations regarding workplace conflict and scheduling were permitted to proceed.

Mekhail v. Dufferin Peel Catholic District School Board, 2017 HRTO 1098

Greg Bullen

50 cases2009–2019

Brian Cook

Practising Law - Employed30 cases2017–2026

Application alleging age discrimination in WSIB hearing loss policy dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

The applicant alleged age discrimination after the WSIB reduced his noise-induced hearing loss calculation based on a policy that deducts 0.5 decibels for each year a worker's age exceeds 60.

Tozer v. Workplace Safety Insurance Board, 2017 HRTO 1097

Adrien Iafrate

Brian Cook

In Private Practice14 cases2014–2026

Summary hearing to dismiss human rights applications denied due to factual disputes requiring evidence.

The applicants, who self-identify as Metis and as persons with disabilities, alleged discrimination regarding their treatment while incarcerated at the Niagara Detention Centre.

The respondent denied the allegations, asserting the complaints related to non-Code factors like under-staffing and over-crowding, and disputed the factual claims.

Moore v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2017 HRTO 1082

Sabatina Vassalli

Lonny Rosen

In Private Practice14 cases2005–2025

Ella Venhola

2 cases2017–2017

Cheryl Ellison

Practising Law - Employed33 cases2007–2025

Amanda Smallwood

10 cases2013–2026

Brian Cook

Tribunal refuses to dismiss human rights application under s. 45.1, finding clinical review mechanism did not address discrimination.

The applicant, a child with Autism Spectrum Disorder, alleged discrimination regarding his discharge from IBI therapy provided by Kinark.

The Tribunal ruled that historical treatment allegations were untimely for remedial purposes but could be introduced as context.

The applicant was directed to clarify the specific allegations against the IRM reviewer and coordinator.

A.T. v. Kinark Child and Family Services, 2017 HRTO 1081

Nicholas Ellegood

2 cases2016–2017

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 27, 2017

Summary hearing dismissal denied; discrimination application regarding retail store interaction to proceed.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application had no reasonable prospect of success.

Finding differing accounts of the interaction between the parties, the Tribunal concluded the application could not be dismissed at this stage and directed the respondent to file a Response.

Joan Powell v. Best Buy Canada, 2017 HRTO 956

Roy Filion

55 cases1987–2019

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 25, 2017

Summary hearing to dismiss human rights applications denied; request to amend applications granted.

The applicant brought human rights applications on behalf of herself and her child, alleging discrimination in education services by the school board and personal respondents.

The Tribunal found that the allegations depended on context and evidence, and therefore could not be dismissed at this stage.

The Tribunal granted the request to amend the applications and deferred the issue of removing the personal respondents to the hearing adjudicator.

N.W. v. Peel District School Board, 2017 HRTO 943

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioDec 29, 2016

Human rights application alleging age discrimination and reprisal dismissed due to bad faith and interpersonal conflict.

The applicant, a volunteer Chief Flight Instructor at a model aviation club, alleged discrimination on the basis of age and reprisal after being asked to step down from his position.

The Tribunal found that the email's reference to age was a pretext to avoid addressing the conflict, and that the applicant knew age was not the real reason.

The Tribunal dismissed the age discrimination claim.

Murray v. Toronto Electric Model Aviation Club, 2016 HRTO 1692

Hera Evans

Practising Law - Employed24 cases2014–2026

Brian Cook

In Private Practice4 cases2010–2026

Most reprisal allegations dismissed at summary hearing; one threat of segregation allowed to proceed.

The applicant, an inmate, filed three applications alleging reprisal under section 8 of the Human Rights Code against correctional staff.

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

Mazia v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2016 HRTO 1678

Arif Raza

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed at summary hearing for having no reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant alleged discrimination, harassment, and reprisal on the grounds of creed and marital status against a mosque and associated individuals.

The applicant claimed he experienced unpleasant looks and false rumours in the mosque's neighbourhood.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing and dismissed the application, concluding there was no reasonable prospect the applicant could prove his allegations under the Human Rights Code.

Amir Hussain v. Madina Mosque and Skinder Khan, 2016 HRTO 1675

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioDec 16, 2016

Request for reconsideration of summary dismissal denied as applicant failed to meet Rule 26.5 criteria.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his application following a summary hearing.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's disagreement with the summary hearing process and the outcome was not a sufficient reason for reconsideration under Rule 26.5.

The request for reconsideration was denied.

Borden v. York University, 2016 HRTO 1622

Prya Morley

1 case2016–2016

Erica Richler

In Private Practice266 cases2008–2026

Brian Cook

In Private Practice2 cases2015–2016

Human rights application against professional association dismissed as barred by statutory immunity and evidentiary restrictions.

The HRPA had disciplined the applicant for failing to disclose the College's finding on her annual information return.

The Tribunal held a preliminary hearing and dismissed the application.

The Tribunal also denied the applicant's request to add the College as a respondent because those allegations had been dismissed in a previous application.

Judith Pidgeon v. Human Resources Professional Association, 2016 HRTO 1607

Anthony Lungu

Brian Cook

Human rights application dismissed due to late reactivation request and prior OLRB finding on termination.

The applicant sought to reactivate a human rights application that had been deferred pending an Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB) proceeding regarding his termination.

The reactivation request was filed past the 60-day deadline, and the applicant's paralegal failed to provide sufficient medical evidence to justify the delay.

The Tribunal denied the request to reactivate.

Allegations regarding earlier discriminatory comments were also dismissed as being out of time.

Jaswinder Ahluwalia v. Plastic Dress Up Ltd., 2016 HRTO 1603

Brian Cook

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioDec 2, 2016

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Case Assessment Direction.

The applicant filed an application with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario but also commenced a civil action seeking an order for an alleged infringement of her rights under the Code.

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

The applicant failed to make submissions or contact the Tribunal.

Consequently, the application was dismissed as abandoned and the scheduled hearing was cancelled.

Maria Elisa Cruz Tarnate v. Medrehab Group Inc., 2016 HRTO 1546

Dianne Jozefacki

Brian Cook

Tribunal allows human rights application to proceed, finding it is not barred by a prior release.

The applicant, who requires a power wheelchair, alleged discrimination with respect to services because of disability.

The respondent requested the application be dismissed, arguing it was barred by a prior settlement and release, and alternatively had no reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal found the release did not bar the application because the allegations concerned a conversation that occurred after the release was signed.

The Tribunal directed the matter to mediation.

Daugherty v. Shoppers Home Health Care Canada Inc., 2016 HRTO 1484

Brian Cook

Not Practising Law23 cases2010–2017

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

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal in employment, claiming he was terminated after complaining about racial profiling.

The respondent requested that the application be deferred because the applicant had filed concurrent grievances under a collective agreement based on the same facts.

Cox v. The Woodbridge Group (Foam), 2016 HRTO 1482

Indira Sawh

Brian Cook

Summary hearing request to dismiss inmate's discrimination application regarding medical treatment and protective custody denied.

The applicant, an inmate, alleged discrimination based on disability regarding the denial of necessary medications and his placement in protective custody.

The respondent requested a summary hearing to dismiss the application for having no reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal also found the protective custody allegations required further evidence.

The request to dismiss the application was denied.

Kift v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2016 HRTO 1463

Joanna Rainbow

16 cases2010–2016

Bruce Ellis

25 cases2005–2023

Brian Cook