Mediation cancelled and case management directions issued after respondents refused to participate.
The applicant filed an application under section 53(3) of the Human Rights Code.
The Tribunal scheduled a mediation, but the respondents refused to participate.
The Tribunal cancelled the mediation and issued a case management direction requiring the parties to exchange documents and statements of facts in preparation for a case resolution conference.
Tribunal issues final deadline for respondent to file response after failing to attend mediation.
The applicant filed a human rights application under section 53(3) of the Human Rights Code.
The respondent failed to file a response and did not attend mediation.
The Tribunal issued an interim decision warning the respondent that failure to participate could lead to orders against them without further notice.
The respondent was given a final deadline of December 24, 2008, to file a response with an explanation for the delay.
Tribunal accepted late-filed Response and issued procedural directions for case resolution conference.
In a previous interim decision, the Tribunal directed the respondents to file a Response and explain their delay.
The respondents subsequently filed their Response.
The Tribunal accepted the filing and directed the parties to exchange statements of additional facts, remedies sought, and arguably relevant documents in preparation for a case resolution conference.
Four human rights applications alleging family status discrimination consolidated for mediation.
The applicants filed four separate applications alleging discrimination on the basis of family status in the areas of accommodation, services, goods, and facilities against a condominium corporation and a property management company.
The Tribunal issued an interim decision ordering that the four applications proceed together for the purposes of mediation, as they involve identical facts and raise similar legal issues.
Human rights application deferred pending outcome of grievance arbitration on same subject matter.
The respondents requested a deferral of the human rights application pending the outcome of a grievance arbitration on the same subject matter.
The applicant and the trade union agreed to the deferral.
The Tribunal found that the issues in the application and the grievance arbitration were largely indistinguishable and that the arbitrator had the power to enforce human rights obligations.
The Tribunal granted the request and deferred the application pending the conclusion of the arbitration.
Human rights application deferred pending the conclusion of an ongoing grievance arbitration concerning the same issues.
The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of age, colour, ethnic origin, and race after being denied a job coach position.
The respondents requested that the application be deferred because a grievance arbitration concerning the same job selection process was already underway.
The Tribunal found that the substance of the human rights complaint was largely indistinguishable from the grievance and that the arbitration proceeding should conclude first.
The application was deferred pending the conclusion of the arbitration.
Tribunal directed parties to provide written submissions regarding the relevance of requested documents.
The applicant filed two applications under section 53(3) of the Human Rights Code.
In advance of a scheduled Case Resolution Conference to address preliminary matters, the applicant requested certain documents from the respondents.
When the parties could not resolve the document production issues, the applicant requested an order directing the respondents to provide the material.
The Tribunal directed the applicant to provide written submissions explaining the relevance of the requested documents to the preliminary issues, and directed the respondents to provide responding submissions.
Mediation cancelled and document exchange ordered after respondent refused to participate in scheduled mediation.
The applicant filed a transitional application under section 53(3) of the Human Rights Code.
The respondent refused to participate in the scheduled mediation.
The Tribunal cancelled the mediation and issued a case management direction requiring the parties to exchange documents and statements of fact in preparation for a case resolution conference.
Human rights application deemed abandoned after applicant refused to attend case resolution conference.
The applicant filed a transitional application under section 53(3) of the Human Rights Code but subsequently refused to provide dates for or attend a case resolution conference, citing work commitments.
The Tribunal had previously directed the applicant to provide availability or face abandonment of the application.
As the applicant failed to comply and insisted on a written process for a case requiring oral evidence, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and closed the file.
Two human rights applications arising from the same facts consolidated for the purposes of mediation.
The applicant filed two applications under section 53(3) of the Human Rights Code alleging discrimination in employment and vocational associations on the basis of colour and race.
The Tribunal found that the applications arose out of the same facts and raised similar legal issues.
To ensure a fair, just, and highly expeditious process, the Tribunal ordered that the applications proceed together for the purposes of mediation.
Tribunal directed that respondent's preliminary request for early dismissal be addressed prior to mediation.
The applicant filed a transitional application under section 53(3) of the Human Rights Code regarding special education programs and services.
The respondent sought early dismissal of the application, arguing the claims were fully adjudicated in a prior proceeding and that the local school board was the proper respondent.
The Tribunal exercised its discretion to alter the standard process of early mediation, directing that the respondent's preliminary request for early dismissal be addressed first, and set a schedule for written submissions and a case resolution conference.
Two human rights applications involving similar facts and issues consolidated for the purposes of mediation.
The applicant filed two human rights applications under section 53(3) of the Human Rights Code against her former employer and her bargaining agent, alleging discrimination on the basis of age and disability.
The Tribunal found that the applications involved substantially similar facts and legal issues.
Five human rights applications alleging age and sex discrimination consolidated for mediation.
Five applicants filed transitional applications under section 53(3) of the Human Rights Code alleging discrimination in contract and employment on the basis of age and sex against the same respondent.
The Tribunal found that the applications involved similar facts and legal issues.
The respondents refused to participate in the scheduled mediation.
The Tribunal cancelled the mediation and issued a case management direction requiring the parties to exchange arguably relevant documents and prepare for a case resolution conference.
The Tribunal scheduled a mediation, but the respondents refused to participate on the basis that settlement efforts had been exhausted.
The Tribunal cancelled the mediation and issued a case management direction, ordering the parties to exchange documents and provide available dates for a case resolution conference.
Tribunal issues case management directions after respondents refuse mediation and fail to file Response.
The respondents refused to participate in the scheduled mediation, citing a previous unsuccessful mediation, and failed to file a Response within the required time limits.
The Tribunal cancelled the mediation and issued case management directions, warning the respondents that failure to file a Response could result in the Tribunal proceeding without them and deeming them to have accepted the allegations.
Three related age discrimination applications consolidated to proceed together for mediation.
Three applications were filed under section 53(3) of the Human Rights Code alleging age discrimination in employment.
The respondents raised preliminary objections that the substance of the applications had been dealt with in grievance arbitrations.
The Tribunal found that the applications involved substantially similar facts and legal issues, and ordered that they proceed together for the purposes of mediation.
Tribunal directs human rights applications to proceed together and schedules preliminary issues before mediation.
The applicant filed two transitional applications under section 53(3) of the Human Rights Code against her employer and her union.
The respondents raised preliminary objections, arguing the matters were resolved by settlement or dealt with by the Ontario Labour Relations Board.
The Tribunal directed that the applications proceed together and cancelled the scheduled mediation so that the preliminary issues could be addressed first.
Tribunal issues case management directions after respondents refuse mediation and fail to file a Response.
The respondents refused to participate in the scheduled mediation and failed to file a Response within the required time limits.
The Tribunal cancelled the mediation and issued case management directions, warning the respondents that failure to file a Response could result in the Tribunal proceeding without further notice to them.
Tribunal cancelled mediation to hear preliminary objections after respondents refused to participate.
The applicant filed a transitional application under section 53(3) of the Human Rights Code alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, and sought to amend the complaint to add record of offences.
The respondents refused to participate in the scheduled mediation and raised preliminary issues, including that the substance of the application had been dealt with in another proceeding.
The Tribunal exercised its discretion to cancel the mediation and directed the parties to file written submissions on the preliminary issues prior to scheduling a case resolution conference.