Douglas Sanderson

Not Practising Law - Employed16 cases2009–2017

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Notice of Intent to Dismiss.

The applicant filed an application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code alleging discrimination in employment.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because the application failed to identify any specific acts of discrimination connected to a protected ground under the Code.

The applicant was directed to file written submissions but failed to do so.

As a result, the Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Samarco v. Forget About It Supper Club, 2017 HRTO 1551

Clara Matheson

Douglas Sanderson

Request to add three organizational respondents to human rights application granted on consent.

The applicant filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings to add three organizational respondents to her human rights application alleging discrimination in employment based on disability.

The respondents did not oppose the request and provided their correct legal names.

The Tribunal granted the request on consent and amended the style of cause to include the new organizational respondents.

De Andrade v. Revera Inc., 2017 HRTO 1550

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed for delay as ignorance of rights did not constitute good faith.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging a sexual advance by a member of the respondent YMCA.

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

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

The applicant's only explanation for the delay was ignorance of his legal rights.

The Tribunal found that ignorance of rights does not constitute a good faith explanation for delay where the applicant had reason to inquire about his rights but chose not to.

The application was dismissed for delay.

Hunter v. YMCA, 2017 HRTO 1546

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioNov 20, 2017

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Notice of Intent to Dismiss.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination with respect to goods, services and facilities.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (NOID) because the application appeared to be filed outside the one-year limitation period without citing facts constituting good faith.

The applicant failed to file submissions in response to the NOID despite being granted an extension of time.

The Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Hunter v. Snap Fitness, 2017 HRTO 1523

Tribunal orders disclosure of internal HR email, rejecting respondent's claim of litigation privilege.

The applicant, who was dismissed from his employment after advising he would be absent for medical reasons, brought a request for an order requiring the respondent to produce an internal HR email.

The respondent claimed the email was protected by litigation privilege because it was created on the day of the applicant's dismissal.

The Tribunal found that the respondent failed to establish the email was created for the dominant purpose of litigation and ordered its disclosure.

Greeley v. Linamar Performance Centre, 2017 HRTO 1486

Paul Macchione

In Private Practice10 cases2014–2026

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioNov 7, 2017

Summary dismissal partially granted; workplace name-calling allegations allowed to proceed as potential discrimination.

The applicant alleged discrimination in employment based on gender identity and marital status, claiming a co-worker spread gossip and shared personal information with the applicant's estranged husband.

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

The Tribunal found that most of the allegations related to interpersonal conflict and had no connection to the Code.

However, the Tribunal allowed the application to proceed regarding allegations that the co-worker repeatedly called the applicant a 'crazy bitch' or 'psycho bitch', as these could engage the grounds of disability or perceived disability and sex.

Rowena Young v. Costco Wholesale Canada Ltd. and Kelly Barber, 2017 HRTO 1466

Tiffany Heffernan

In Private Practice1 case2017–2017

Elichai Shaffir

In Private Practice25 cases2010–2021

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioNov 3, 2017

Employer breached duty to accommodate by failing to inform supervisor of employee's specific medical restrictions.

The applicant filed a human rights application on behalf of his brother, a grocery clerk with a cognitive disability and physical restrictions due to a back injury.

The applicant alleged the respondent employer failed to accommodate the claimant's physical restrictions by requiring him to lift heavy items and kneel.

The Tribunal found that while the employer made good faith efforts to accommodate the claimant, it breached its procedural duty by failing to provide the claimant's specific medical restrictions to his direct supervisor.

This led to a substantive failure to accommodate, as the claimant continued to perform tasks outside his restrictions.

The Tribunal ordered the respondent to pay $500 in damages for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect, and to clearly identify and communicate the claimant's restrictions to ensure future compliance.

Bonnici v. Loblaws Inc., 2017 HRTO 1456

Steve Lavender

23 cases2009–2026

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioOct 30, 2017

Human rights application partially dismissed under s. 45.1 due to prior grievance settlement and arbitration.

The applicant, a transit operator, alleged racial discrimination and harassment by his employer, the Toronto Transit Commission.

The respondent requested that the application be dismissed under section 45.1 of the Human Rights Code, arguing that the substance of the allegations had been dealt with in a prior grievance settlement and a labour arbitration.

The Tribunal dismissed the allegations relating to a February 2012 incident and the applicant's termination, finding that the grievance settlement and the arbitrator's finding of just cause appropriately dealt with those issues.

However, the Tribunal allowed the remaining allegations of differential treatment and harassment to proceed, finding they had a reasonable prospect of success.

Parkinson v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2017 HRTO 1426

Douglas Sanderson

Not Practising Law3 cases2016–2020

Interlocutory request for broad production of documents denied as an overly broad fishing expedition.

The applicant in a human rights proceeding alleging sexual harassment and reprisal requested an order requiring the organizational respondent to produce all notes taken by work transition specialists and investigators between 2011 and 2017.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the applicant failed to establish the arguable relevance of the documents and that the request was overly broad, amounting to a fishing expedition.

David Armstrong v. Workplace Safety and Insurance Board and Chris Madden, 2017 HRTO 1396

Kyla Fair

Douglas Sanderson

Requests to expedite proceedings and for interim remedy denied as trivial and vexatious.

The applicant filed a Request to Expedite Proceedings and a Request for Interim Remedy in an application alleging discrimination in the occupancy of accommodation.

The Tribunal refused the Request to Expedite Proceedings.

The Tribunal also denied the Request for Interim Remedy, finding that the applicant failed to establish an arguable case and that the requests were trivial, vexatious, and an abuse of process.

R.J. Potomski v. Corporation of the City of Windsor et al., 2017 HRTO 1394

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioOct 19, 2017

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to comply with Tribunal directions.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment based on disability, age, record of offences, and reprisal.

The Tribunal issued an Interim Decision directing the applicant to specify the remedies sought.

Despite multiple reminder letters and deadlines, the applicant failed to file any submissions in response.

Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Wayne Gable v. Hass Enterprises Inc., 2017 HRTO 1393

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant passed away and estate failed to respond.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination with respect to goods, services and facilities because of age.

The applicant subsequently passed away.

The Tribunal directed the applicant's estate to provide a Certificate of Appointment of Estate Trustee or request that the matter be held in abeyance.

The estate failed to respond to the Tribunal's communications.

The application was dismissed as abandoned.

Stephen v. Royal Ottawa Health Care Group, 2017 HRTO 1376

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Notice of Intent to Dismiss.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination with respect to goods, services, and facilities.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because the application appeared to be filed outside the one-year limitation period without citing facts to establish good faith.

The applicant failed to file written submissions in response to the Notice.

Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Peter Lofters v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Transportation, Laura Slade, and Curtis Handford, 2017 HRTO 1375

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed for delay; waiting for respondent's reply is not a good faith explanation.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging age discrimination regarding a vehicle purchase that occurred in October 2014.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because the application was filed more than one year after the alleged incident.

The applicant argued that the respondent's failure to communicate delayed his filing.

The Tribunal found that waiting for another process to conclude or for the respondent to reply does not constitute a good faith explanation for delay under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The application was dismissed for delay.

Grovum v. Highbury Ford Sales Limited, 2017 HRTO 1374

Douglas Sanderson

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

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

After failing to attend a scheduled mediation session, the Tribunal directed the applicant to confirm his intentions regarding the application by a specified date, warning that failure to respond could result in dismissal.

The applicant did not respond to the correspondence.

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

Dixon v. ABA Machine and Welding (Barrie) Inc., 2017 HRTO 1373

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to jurisdictional notice.

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

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because the respondent appeared to be a federally regulated employer, placing the matter outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction.

The applicant failed to respond to the Notice and subsequent communications.

The Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Leavoy v. Linamar Transportation – Part of Linamar Corporation, 2017 HRTO 1371

Douglas Sanderson

Witness permitted to testify by telephone after relocating out of province.

In an ongoing human rights proceeding, the respondents requested that a witness be permitted to testify by telephone because he had relocated out of province for new employment.

The applicant opposed the request on the basis that no updated medical information had been provided.

The Tribunal granted the request, finding that the request was based on relocation rather than medical reasons, and that the applicant failed to demonstrate significant prejudice from an electronic hearing.

Amazan v. Toronto District Catholic School Board, 2017 HRTO 1356

Douglas Sanderson

Practising Law - Employed20 cases2005–2017

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Notice of Intent to Dismiss.

The applicant filed an application alleging employment discrimination under the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (NOID) because the application appeared to be filed outside the one-year limitation period without citing facts to establish good faith.

The applicant failed to file written submissions in response to the NOID.

Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Javadi v. Beigei, 2017 HRTO 1352

Patricia Matusiak

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioOct 12, 2017

Respondent granted access to applicant's occupational health file to defend disability discrimination claim.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment based on disability, claiming the respondent refused to accommodate him with modified duties.

The respondent requested an interim order authorizing access to the applicant's Occupational Health and Claims Management file to defend the application, citing potential conflicts between privacy legislation and employer duties.

The Tribunal found the documents arguably relevant and granted the respondent access to the file, limited to the applicant's 2017 absence, as well as an extension of time to file its Response.

Marques v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2017 HRTO 1344

Melissa Eldridge

In Private Practice2 cases2017–2024

Anne Gregory

9 cases2012–2017

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioOct 10, 2017

Tribunal limits further cross-examination and dismisses applicant's requests to remove opposing counsel and for recusal.

In an ongoing human rights application, the Tribunal issued an interim decision addressing the applicant's request to continue cross-examining a witness and several requests for orders during the proceeding.

The Tribunal limited further cross-examination, finding it had been sufficient to disclose fully and fairly all relevant matters.

The Tribunal also dismissed the applicant's requests to remove opposing counsel, to amend previous interim decisions, and for the adjudicator to recuse himself for bias, finding no basis for any of the requests.

Finally, the Tribunal declined to order an individual respondent to attend the next hearing dates, noting that parties must be prepared to make submissions regarding her medical absence if she does not attend.

Amazan v. Toronto Catholic District School Board, 2017 HRTO 1336

Affected Party

Toronto Police ServiceSelf-represented
1 appearance

Applicant

Nina SouroushSelf-represented
1 appearance
Changhyun ParkSelf-represented
1 appearance
Bailee BuckmaterSelf-represented
1 appearance
Ardalan RobatiSelf-represented
1 appearance
Coleen JacobSelf-represented
1 appearance
Lewis HoppsSelf-represented
1 appearance
Emmanuel OxleySelf-represented
1 appearance
Nathalie CarrierSelf-represented
1 appearance
Leslie AustinSelf-represented
1 appearance
Sabina MulosmaniSelf-represented
1 appearance
Diana BoltinskySelf-represented
1 appearance
Stephanie TarczySelf-represented
1 appearance
Joseph WhitwellSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kevin WerbeskiAgent
1 appearance
Donna RyderSelf-represented
1 appearance
John GarlandSelf-represented
1 appearance
Warner GrovumSelf-represented
1 appearance
Liudmila GubrenkoSelf-represented
1 appearance
Clayton FullerSelf-represented
1 appearance
Garfield SimmsSelf-represented
1 appearance

Counsel

Caroline RichardCounsel
1 appearance
Paul MeierCounsel
1 appearance
Thomas StefanikCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Respondent

Daphne FedorukCounsel
1 appearance
Catherine ConradCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Respondents

Glenn ChristieCounsel
1 appearance
Patricia G. MurrayCounsel
1 appearance

for 1103531 Ontario Inc., c.o.b. as Video Plus

Pieter JoubertCounsel
1 appearance

for Atikokan Native Friendship Centre

Carolyn KayCounsel
1 appearance

for Bennett Health Care Centre

Brent ForemanCounsel
1 appearance

for Bill Tough

Robert HealeyCounsel
1 appearance

for Bruyere Continuing Care, Pamela Eisener-Parsche and Anne Harley, Respondents

Jacquie DagherCounsel
1 appearance

for Canadian Federation of Independent Unions (CNFIU), Charlene Nero

Erin HallockCounsel
1 appearance

for Canadian Soccer Association

Richard SinclairCounsel
1 appearance

for Community Living Atikokan

Garth O’NeilCounsel
1 appearance

for Dr. Ronald Dykeman

Elizabeth GraceCounsel
1 appearance

for eHealth Ontario and Lynn Corkum

Mark A. StoneCounsel
1 appearance

for Essex County Soccer Association and Ontario Soccer Association

Robert RichlerCounsel
1 appearance

for Etobicoke Youth Soccer Club and Remo DiCarlo

Robert RichlerCounsel
1 appearance

for General Paint Corporation, Dick Glassford, and Horst Kreissler

Patrick GannonCounsel
1 appearance

for Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario

Taylor RansomCounsel
2 appearances

for Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care

Caroline CohenCounsel
1 appearance

for Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of the Attorney General

Sandra NishikawaCounsel
1 appearance

for herself

Ewa GulbinowiczSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Labourers’ Workers Union, LIUNA, Local 183

Tracey HenryCounsel
1 appearance

for Loop

Mr. GeigerCounsel
1 appearance

for Mano Sachithananthan

Mano SachithananthanSelf-represented
1 appearance

for MCI Medical Clinics Inc., Robert Carleton, and Sophie Ritchie

Alex Van KralingenCounsel
1 appearance

for Ontario Public Service Employees Union

Hillary CookCounsel
1 appearance

for Peter Bernotas, Marie-Josée Duchesne, Doreen Pierini, Nicole Gueigueirre

Jerry RasoCounsel
1 appearance

for Securitas Canada Limited

Dan McDonaldCounsel
1 appearance

for Shohiduzzaman Chayan

Jordan RumanekAgent
1 appearance

for Soler D&V Licensing (Thornhill) Inc. and Lori Soler

Alex SolerAgent
1 appearance

for St. Michael’s Hospital, Cheryl Adoranti, Catherine Valentini and Denise Wilson

Michelle HenryCounsel
1 appearance

for the Affected Parties

Allan McKitrickCounsel
1 appearance
Ansuya PachaiCounsel
1 appearance

for the Affected Party

Adrienne LiangCounsel
1 appearance
Robert HealeyCounsel
1 appearance
Sue LottCounsel
1 appearance

for the Affected Party, Toronto Police Service Board

Ansuya PachaiCounsel
1 appearance

for the applicant

Emily DenommeCounsel
1 appearance
Isabelle Roy-NunnCounsel
1 appearance
Mr. FisherCounsel
1 appearance

for the Applicant

Allen RosarioSelf-represented
6 appearances
Ronald IhaszSelf-represented
6 appearances
Wade PoziomkaCounsel
6 appearances
Jamie McGinnisCounsel
4 appearances
Cecil NormanAgent
4 appearances
Rhonda HowellsAgent
4 appearances
David ArmstrongSelf-represented
4 appearances
Danielle BisnarCounsel
4 appearances
Felix AmazanSelf-represented
3 appearances
Kate SellarCounsel
3 appearances
Shahenaz AlibhaiSelf-represented
3 appearances
Christine LundyAgent
3 appearances
David BakerCounsel
3 appearances
C.G.Self-represented
3 appearances
Sachchu KhanSelf-represented
3 appearances
Angela ManciniAgent
3 appearances
Katherine LinSelf-represented
3 appearances
Patrick JamesCounsel
3 appearances
Joseph WhitwellSelf-represented
2 appearances
Randy KingSelf-represented
2 appearances

for the Applicants

Karen SanchezCounsel
2 appearances
Roger LoveCounsel
1 appearance
Michelle BoyceSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kate SellarCounsel
1 appearance
E.L.Self-represented
1 appearance
Sharmaine HallCounsel
1 appearance

for the College of Nurses of Ontario

Katharine MontpetitCounsel
3 appearances
Raj AnandCounsel
3 appearances

for the Former Respondent

Brent ForemanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Interested Party

Peter HardingCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor

Jerry RasoCounsel
2 appearances
Kate HughesCounsel
1 appearance
Nini JonesCounsel
1 appearance
Geri SansonCounsel
1 appearance
Adam WebbCounsel
1 appearance
Paul O’RyanCounsel
1 appearance
Devon PaulCounsel
1 appearance
Tom RookeCounsel
1 appearance
Faisal BhabaCounsel
1 appearance
Elichai ShaffirCounsel
1 appearance
Anne GregoryCounsel
1 appearance
Elizabeth NurseCounsel
1 appearance
Alana MihaljCounsel
1 appearance
Lori KentCounsel
1 appearance
Mona StaplesCounsel
1 appearance
Jessica AmeyCounsel
1 appearance
Ryan GoldvineCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor Canadian Auto Workers' Union - Canada

Lewis GottheilCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor Canadian Civil Liberties Association

Sukanya PillayCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor, Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 1328

Devin PaulCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor Nishnawbe-Gamik Friendship Centre

Holly WalbourneCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor Ontario Nurses Association

Kate HughesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor Vaughan Professional Firefighters Association

Cynthia PetersenCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ontario Human Rights Commission

Cathy PikeCounsel
1 appearance

for the Pay Equity Office

Ayumi BaillyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Polish Mutual Benefit Society

Mark MikulasikCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed Respondent

Cindy CohenCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed Respondent Alan Jackson

William R. CounterCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed Respondent, Nishnawbe-Gamik Friendship Centre

Holly WalbourneCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed Respondents Rick Hampton and Dina Hampton

Stephen PanzerCounsel
1 appearance

for the respondent

Carolyn KayCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent

Paul MeierCounsel
6 appearances
Steve LavenderCounsel
5 appearances
Holly WalbourneCounsel
5 appearances
Brenda BowlbyCounsel
3 appearances
Bettina BurgessCounsel
3 appearances
Gita AnandCounsel
3 appearances
Marni TolenskyCounsel
3 appearances
Laura KarabulutCounsel
3 appearances
Jonathan MaierCounsel
3 appearances
Murray WrightSelf-represented
3 appearances
Kathryn BirdCounsel
3 appearances
Elisha Jamieson-DaviesCounsel
2 appearances
Shana FrenchCounsel
2 appearances
Carissa TanzolaCounsel
2 appearances
Sven PoysaCounsel
2 appearances
John-Paul AlexandrowiczCounsel
2 appearances
Ian SolomonCounsel
2 appearances
Mandy FricotCounsel
2 appearances
Jessica YoungCounsel
2 appearances
Margot BlightCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent 92085 Ontario Inc. o/a Final Touch Services & Alladin Carpet Cleaning

Rod GoodallAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Acclaim Ability Management Inc.

Thomas GorskyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Amalgamated Transit Union 1624

Lisa FinebergCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Bruce Lewis

Lawrence CrackowerCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 2713

Paul O’RyanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 32

Paul O’RyanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 79

Douglas WrayCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent CFJ Nuclear Contractors Ltd.

Richard CharneyCounsel
1 appearance
Daniel McDonaldCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Children and Family Services for York Region

Amelia DaurioCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Children's Aid Society of Ottawa

Carole JenkinsCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent C[...] Inc.

Gary BatasarCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent City of Sarnia

Steven WilsonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent City of Toronto

Darraugh MeagherCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent College of Nurses of Ontario

Raj AnandCounsel
2 appearances
Katharine MontpetitCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Days Inn Lundys Lane

Bradley TroupCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Domenic Alonzi

Enio ZeppieriCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Dr. Eric Spindler

Jennifer KatsunoCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent, Durham Children’s Aid Society

Vincent PanettaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent FCA Canada Inc.

Christopher DunnCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Garda World Cash Services Canada Corporation

Mathieu DuceppeCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Greater Essex County District School Board

Sheila MacKinnonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board

Jane GoodingCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Hamilton-Wentworth Elementary Teachers’ Local

Kate HughesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Her Majesty the Queen as represented by the Minister of Education

Rachel WeinerCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario

Taylor RansomCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Humber River Regional Hospital

Carolyn Cornford GreavesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 636

Craig FloodCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Kapuskasing Ontario Provincial Police

Fatema DadaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Kenneth Alexander

Kenneth AlexanderSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent Kevin Fox

Kevin FoxSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent King Township

M. David RossCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Leslie Perrin

Leslie PerrinSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent Manny Cardosa

James StewartCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Manulife Financial

Sophia ZaidiCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent, Middlesex-London Emergency Medical Services Authority

Stephanie JeronimoCounsel
1 appearance
John SaundersCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Millwright Regional Council of Ontario, Local 1592

Meg AtkinsonCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent Mohammad Reza Nikkhou

Jennifer KatsunoCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent North Eastern Ontario Family and Child Services

Justin EllertCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ontario Nurses Association

Colin JohnstonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ontario Soccer Association

Jessica DiFedericoCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ontario Universities’ Application Centre

Donald KiddCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Paul Armstrong

Glenn ChristieCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ralph Johnson

Jordan LesterCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent, Ralph Johnson

Jordan LesterCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent(s)

Carolyn Cornford GreavesCounsel
1 appearance
Daniel HuffakerCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents

Lynette D’SouzaCounsel
2 appearances
Nicole SmithCounsel
2 appearances
Greg BullenCounsel
2 appearances
Ken MacDonaldCounsel
2 appearances
Michael S. RichardsCounsel
2 appearances
Michael RichardsCounsel
2 appearances
Leslie FrattolinCounsel
2 appearances
Tina EarlCounsel
2 appearances
Patricia G. MurrayCounsel
2 appearances
Sunira ChaudhriCounsel
2 appearances
Ian JohnstoneCounsel
1 appearance
Marnie CorboldCounsel
1 appearance
Erin PorterAgent
1 appearance
Alix HerberCounsel
1 appearance
Peter ThorupCounsel
1 appearance
Jennifer RichardsCounsel
1 appearance
Erik KupkaCounsel
1 appearance
Paul H. StarkmanCounsel
1 appearance
Melissa ArrudaCounsel
1 appearance
Noel John HennessyAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondents and Proposed Respondents

Christopher SinalCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Bram Samaroo and Ryan Pitcher

Christopher McClellandCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Securitas Canada Limited

Daniel McDonaldCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondents Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario, Mathew Curran, Colleen Lee, Jennifer Mitchell and Sharron O’Halloran

Christine DaviesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Service Employees International Union Local 1 Canada

Helen NowakCounsel
1 appearance
Ken EvettUnion representative
1 appearance

for the Respondent Slovenian Linden Foundation

Jacinthe BoudreauCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent SM Medical Centre

Nadia MarottaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Peel District School Board, Mary Anne McArthur, Tina Morrison, Jan Courtin and Shirley Ann Teal

Roy FilionCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Susan Wall

Wade PoziomkaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents William Osler Heath System and Laura Albisu

Christopher ParkesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Winners Merchants International LP, Wendy Murcia, Marie-Jo Lemaire, Pierre Grenier, Natalina Ciarlo, Zeyna Erdogan and Abe Navarro

Allison TaylorCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Teamsters Union Local 419

Michael HancockCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Teamsters Union, Local 419

Michael HancockCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Teston Pipeline Limited

Michael HandlerCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Board of Health for the Toronto Health Unit

Fred FisherCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario

Monica TessierCounsel
1 appearance
Michelle GibbsCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Corporation of the City of Brantford

Heidi de VriesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Corporation of the City of Cambridge

Steve MathesonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Corporation of the City of Thunder Bay

Andrew ZabrovskyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Corporation of the City of Vaughan

Nancy SalernoCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Law Society of Upper Canada

Andrea GonsalvesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Ottawa Hospital

Jacquie DagherCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Ottawa Police Service

David PatacairkCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Regional Municipality of Waterloo Police Services Board

Donald JarvisCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Timmins and District Hospital

Jodi RussellAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Timmins Police Services

Elizabeth MontpetitCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Toyota Motor Manufacturing Canada Inc.

Ted KovacsCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent Trentway Wager / Coach Canada

Craig LawrenceCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent United Steelworkers of America, Local 9597

Shaheen HiraniCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent University of Ontario Institute of Technology

Cheryl FoyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent University of Windsor

David AmyotCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Victorian Order of Nurses

Sarah CrossleyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Workplace Safety and Insurance Board

Agnes WintersingerCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent, York Police Services Board

Stephen MaioCounsel
1 appearance

for the Toronto Catholic District School Board, Carrado Maltese, John Shain, Norma Rios, Jose Cayanan, and Sylvie Talarico

Paul MatthewsCounsel
1 appearance

for The Town of Parry Sound

Charles LoopstraCounsel
1 appearance

for the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board

Gurjit BrarCounsel
1 appearance

for Total Security Management

David McKechnieCounsel
1 appearance

for Unicco Facility Services Canada Company

Melanie McNaughtCounsel
1 appearance

for Unifor Canada, Local 1285, Leon Rideout and Ardis Snow, Respondents

Niki LundquistCounsel
1 appearance

Next Friend for Madison Reece

Rachel ChetwynAgent
1 appearance

Representative

Shaun CrymbleAgent
1 appearance

Representative for the Respondents

Judit SchonwaldAgent
1 appearance

Representative for Xiaorui Sun

Qizhi JiaoAgent
1 appearance

Respondent

Cheryl FoyCounsel
1 appearance
Iain DonnellCounsel
1 appearance
Herman GrewalSelf-represented
1 appearance
Steven WilsonCounsel
1 appearance
Joyce TravagliniAgent
1 appearance
Said KarimiSelf-represented
1 appearance
Paula RusakCounsel
1 appearance

Respondents

William WatsonCounsel
1 appearance
Christopher McClellandCounsel
1 appearance
Jordan KirknessCounsel
1 appearance

Self-represented

Timothy OgilvieSelf-represented
1 appearance
Ronald IhaszSelf-represented
1 appearance
Christine ClarkeSelf-represented
1 appearance

667

Decisions

Years active

Tribunals

3.8

cases/mo

HRTO663(99%)

OPEHT4(1%)

Decision types

motion

611

trial

/Adjudicator

Douglas Sanderson — Vice-Chair

Human Rights

Administrative Law

Employment and Labour Law

Other Tribunals

Landlord and Tenant

Bankruptcy and Insolvency Law

Workplace Safety and Insurance Law

Indigenous Legal Issues

Family and Matrimonial Law

Health Law

Douglas Sanderson

Vice-Chair·Ontario Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal·Since 2011

OPEHT HRTO

667

cases · 15 yrs · HRTO, OPEHT

Trial

Motion

Costs

Appeal

Sentencing

Vice-chair· 491Adjudicator· 82Vice-chair· 67Adjudicator· 18Vice Chair· 5Vice-Chair· 4

Douglas Sanderson

Not Practising Law - Employed16 cases2009–2017

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Notice of Intent to Dismiss.

The applicant filed an application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code alleging discrimination in employment.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because the application failed to identify any specific acts of discrimination connected to a protected ground under the Code.

The applicant was directed to file written submissions but failed to do so.

As a result, the Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Samarco v. Forget About It Supper Club, 2017 HRTO 1551

Clara Matheson

Douglas Sanderson

Request to add three organizational respondents to human rights application granted on consent.

The applicant filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings to add three organizational respondents to her human rights application alleging discrimination in employment based on disability.

The respondents did not oppose the request and provided their correct legal names.

The Tribunal granted the request on consent and amended the style of cause to include the new organizational respondents.

De Andrade v. Revera Inc., 2017 HRTO 1550

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed for delay as ignorance of rights did not constitute good faith.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging a sexual advance by a member of the respondent YMCA.

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

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

The applicant's only explanation for the delay was ignorance of his legal rights.

The Tribunal found that ignorance of rights does not constitute a good faith explanation for delay where the applicant had reason to inquire about his rights but chose not to.

The application was dismissed for delay.

Hunter v. YMCA, 2017 HRTO 1546

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioNov 20, 2017

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Notice of Intent to Dismiss.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination with respect to goods, services and facilities.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (NOID) because the application appeared to be filed outside the one-year limitation period without citing facts constituting good faith.

The applicant failed to file submissions in response to the NOID despite being granted an extension of time.

The Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Hunter v. Snap Fitness, 2017 HRTO 1523

Daniel Chodos

In Private Practice19 cases2010–2022

Amelia Cooke

In Private Practice1 case2017–2017

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioNov 10, 2017

Tribunal orders disclosure of internal HR email, rejecting respondent's claim of litigation privilege.

The applicant, who was dismissed from his employment after advising he would be absent for medical reasons, brought a request for an order requiring the respondent to produce an internal HR email.

The respondent claimed the email was protected by litigation privilege because it was created on the day of the applicant's dismissal.

The Tribunal found that the respondent failed to establish the email was created for the dominant purpose of litigation and ordered its disclosure.

Greeley v. Linamar Performance Centre, 2017 HRTO 1486

Paul Macchione

In Private Practice10 cases2014–2026

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioNov 7, 2017

Summary dismissal partially granted; workplace name-calling allegations allowed to proceed as potential discrimination.

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

The Tribunal found that most of the allegations related to interpersonal conflict and had no connection to the Code.

Rowena Young v. Costco Wholesale Canada Ltd. and Kelly Barber, 2017 HRTO 1466

Tiffany Heffernan

In Private Practice1 case2017–2017

Elichai Shaffir

In Private Practice25 cases2010–2021

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioNov 3, 2017

Employer breached duty to accommodate by failing to inform supervisor of employee's specific medical restrictions.

The applicant filed a human rights application on behalf of his brother, a grocery clerk with a cognitive disability and physical restrictions due to a back injury.

The applicant alleged the respondent employer failed to accommodate the claimant's physical restrictions by requiring him to lift heavy items and kneel.

This led to a substantive failure to accommodate, as the claimant continued to perform tasks outside his restrictions.

Bonnici v. Loblaws Inc., 2017 HRTO 1456

Steve Lavender

23 cases2009–2026

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioOct 30, 2017

Human rights application partially dismissed under s. 45.1 due to prior grievance settlement and arbitration.

The applicant, a transit operator, alleged racial discrimination and harassment by his employer, the Toronto Transit Commission.

However, the Tribunal allowed the remaining allegations of differential treatment and harassment to proceed, finding they had a reasonable prospect of success.

Parkinson v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2017 HRTO 1426

Douglas Sanderson

Not Practising Law3 cases2016–2020

Interlocutory request for broad production of documents denied as an overly broad fishing expedition.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the applicant failed to establish the arguable relevance of the documents and that the request was overly broad, amounting to a fishing expedition.

David Armstrong v. Workplace Safety and Insurance Board and Chris Madden, 2017 HRTO 1396

Kyla Fair

Douglas Sanderson

Requests to expedite proceedings and for interim remedy denied as trivial and vexatious.

The applicant filed a Request to Expedite Proceedings and a Request for Interim Remedy in an application alleging discrimination in the occupancy of accommodation.

The Tribunal refused the Request to Expedite Proceedings.

The Tribunal also denied the Request for Interim Remedy, finding that the applicant failed to establish an arguable case and that the requests were trivial, vexatious, and an abuse of process.

R.J. Potomski v. Corporation of the City of Windsor et al., 2017 HRTO 1394

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioOct 19, 2017

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to comply with Tribunal directions.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment based on disability, age, record of offences, and reprisal.

The Tribunal issued an Interim Decision directing the applicant to specify the remedies sought.

Despite multiple reminder letters and deadlines, the applicant failed to file any submissions in response.

Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Wayne Gable v. Hass Enterprises Inc., 2017 HRTO 1393

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant passed away and estate failed to respond.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination with respect to goods, services and facilities because of age.

The applicant subsequently passed away.

The Tribunal directed the applicant's estate to provide a Certificate of Appointment of Estate Trustee or request that the matter be held in abeyance.

The estate failed to respond to the Tribunal's communications.

The application was dismissed as abandoned.

Stephen v. Royal Ottawa Health Care Group, 2017 HRTO 1376

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Notice of Intent to Dismiss.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination with respect to goods, services, and facilities.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because the application appeared to be filed outside the one-year limitation period without citing facts to establish good faith.

The applicant failed to file written submissions in response to the Notice.

Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Peter Lofters v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Transportation, Laura Slade, and Curtis Handford, 2017 HRTO 1375

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed for delay; waiting for respondent's reply is not a good faith explanation.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging age discrimination regarding a vehicle purchase that occurred in October 2014.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because the application was filed more than one year after the alleged incident.

The applicant argued that the respondent's failure to communicate delayed his filing.

The Tribunal found that waiting for another process to conclude or for the respondent to reply does not constitute a good faith explanation for delay under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The application was dismissed for delay.

Grovum v. Highbury Ford Sales Limited, 2017 HRTO 1374

Douglas Sanderson

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

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

The applicant did not respond to the correspondence.

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

Dixon v. ABA Machine and Welding (Barrie) Inc., 2017 HRTO 1373

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to jurisdictional notice.

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

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because the respondent appeared to be a federally regulated employer, placing the matter outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction.

The applicant failed to respond to the Notice and subsequent communications.

The Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Leavoy v. Linamar Transportation – Part of Linamar Corporation, 2017 HRTO 1371

Douglas Sanderson

Witness permitted to testify by telephone after relocating out of province.

In an ongoing human rights proceeding, the respondents requested that a witness be permitted to testify by telephone because he had relocated out of province for new employment.

The applicant opposed the request on the basis that no updated medical information had been provided.

Amazan v. Toronto District Catholic School Board, 2017 HRTO 1356

Douglas Sanderson

Practising Law - Employed20 cases2005–2017

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Notice of Intent to Dismiss.

The applicant filed an application alleging employment discrimination under the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (NOID) because the application appeared to be filed outside the one-year limitation period without citing facts to establish good faith.

The applicant failed to file written submissions in response to the NOID.

Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Javadi v. Beigei, 2017 HRTO 1352

Patricia Matusiak

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioOct 12, 2017

Respondent granted access to applicant's occupational health file to defend disability discrimination claim.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment based on disability, claiming the respondent refused to accommodate him with modified duties.

The Tribunal found the documents arguably relevant and granted the respondent access to the file, limited to the applicant's 2017 absence, as well as an extension of time to file its Response.

Marques v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2017 HRTO 1344

Melissa Eldridge

In Private Practice2 cases2017–2024

Anne Gregory

9 cases2012–2017

Douglas Sanderson