Brian Eyolfson

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability and reprisal, while concurrently pursuing a civil action based on the same facts.

Following an interim decision seeking submissions on whether the application was barred under section 34(11) of the Human Rights Code, the applicant requested to withdraw her application without prejudice to her right to re-file if she discontinued the civil action.

The respondents took no position on the withdrawal but noted the one-year limitation period under section 34.

The Tribunal permitted the application to be withdrawn without terms.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw their human rights application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The request was filed on the applicant's behalf by the intervenor union, and the respondent made no submissions.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw his application filed under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The respondents made no submissions on the request.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw their human rights application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The respondent consented to the request.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw her application under section 45.9 of the Human Rights Code.

The respondents made no submissions on the request.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

The applicant requested to withdraw the human rights application against several respondents, including Markham Stouffville Hospital, based on Minutes of Settlement.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision inviting the remaining respondents to indicate any objections to the partial withdrawal by a specified date.

The applicant failed to provide updated contact information after notices of hearing and interim decisions were returned as undeliverable.

The Tribunal directed the applicant to provide a current mailing address and confirm his interest in proceeding, warning that failure to do so could result in abandonment.

The applicant did not respond.

The Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

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

Despite agreeing to mediation, the applicant failed to provide available dates or respond to subsequent Tribunal correspondence.

The Tribunal warned the applicant that failure to respond would result in the application being deemed abandoned.

When the applicant still did not respond, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of race, ancestry, and sex.

After the respondent filed its Response, the applicant's former counsel advised they no longer represented her and she had moved to Ontario.

The Tribunal directed the applicant to provide her current contact information and confirm her intention to proceed with the application by April 16, 2009, failing which the application may be deemed abandoned.

The applicant, a firefighter, alleged discrimination on the basis of sex and family status after her request for modified duties during pregnancy was denied.

She sought to add her employer, the City of Windsor, as an organizational respondent.

The Tribunal granted the request, finding that the allegations could support a finding of vicarious liability and that the employer identified no prejudice.

The Tribunal also invited written submissions on whether the application should be deferred pending the resolution of an ongoing union grievance based on the same facts.

The applicant filed an Application for Contravention of Settlement and a Request to Expedite Proceedings.

The Tribunal denied the request to expedite, finding no truly urgent circumstances.

Noting a potential jurisdictional issue regarding whether the underlying settlement was approved by the Commission under the old Part IV of the Human Rights Code, the Tribunal ordered the Commission to provide a statement of facts and directed the parties to file submissions on jurisdiction.

The applicant filed an application alleging reprisal in employment after her name was removed from a supply teachers' roster.

The respondent argued the application lacked merit as no Code grounds were identified.

The Tribunal noted it does not have general power over employment disputes and directed the applicant to provide written submissions explaining how the application raises matters within the Tribunal's jurisdiction under the Code.

The applicant filed an Application alleging Contravention of Settlement against the respondents.

The respondents failed to file a Response within the required 14-day period.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision warning the respondents of the consequences of failing to respond and granting them 10 days to file a Response along with an explanation for the delay.

The applicant filed a human rights application against the respondent.

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

The Tribunal issued an interim decision warning the respondent that failure to file a Response by March 24, 2009, could result in the Tribunal proceeding without further notice and deeming the respondent to have accepted the allegations.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw his human rights application pursuant to Rule 10 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The respondent made no submissions.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, noting he was forced to declare bankruptcy.

The Tribunal previously directed the applicant to provide the name and contact information of his trustee in bankruptcy.

After the applicant failed to respond, the Tribunal issued an interim decision directing the applicant to provide the requested information by a specified date, failing which the application would be considered abandoned.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging employment discrimination against three individual respondents.

One respondent was no longer employed at the address provided by the applicant, and the Tribunal was not satisfied he had received notice.

The Tribunal ordered the applicant to provide a current and accurate address for the unlocatable respondent within 20 days if he wished to proceed against him, noting the applicant could request an order requiring the former employer to provide contact information.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal, while also having commenced a civil action based on the same facts.

The Tribunal previously sought submissions on whether the application was barred under section 34(11) of the Human Rights Code.

The applicant subsequently requested to withdraw her application without prejudice.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision directing the applicant to properly deliver her request to withdraw to the respondents and setting a schedule for the respondents' response and the applicant's reply.

The respondent requested that six applications alleging discrimination in services on the basis of disability be consolidated or heard together.

The Tribunal deferred considering the request until the respondent filed its remaining responses to the applications, directing it to do so by a specified date.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment.

The respondents requested early dismissal under section 53(8) of the Human Rights Code, arguing a complaint based on the same facts was previously filed with the Commission.

The applicant opposed the request, providing a letter indicating the Commission file was closed as withdrawn.

To assist in resolving the early dismissal request, the Tribunal directed the Commission to provide a statement of facts regarding the processing and apparent withdrawal of the prior complaint.