Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 14, 2014

Human rights application deferred pending completion of concurrent union grievance process.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging the respondent failed to accommodate his disability by refusing to transfer him to another department after a medical leave.

The respondent requested deferral because the applicant's union had filed a grievance based on the same facts and human rights issues.

The Tribunal found substantial overlap between the proceedings and deferred the application pending the completion of the grievance process, noting the applicant could reactivate the application if his human rights issues were not adequately addressed.

Burai v. 2095527 Ontario Ltd., 2014 HRTO 197

Request to reactivate deferred human rights application denied; request to amend application granted.

The applicant requested to reactivate his human rights application, which had been deferred pending the outcome of a WSIB proceeding, and to amend the application to include new allegations.

The Tribunal denied the request to reactivate, finding that the WSIB proceeding had not been unduly prolonged and that concurrent proceedings would risk inconsistent decisions.

The Tribunal granted the unopposed request to amend the application.

Sujnarine Samaroo v. Victaulic Company of Canada Limited, 2014 HRTO 200

Dawn Phillips-Brown

12 cases2014–2024

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 12, 2014

Request to adjourn mediation denied as it was untimely and lacked exceptional circumstances.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, claiming the respondent failed to accommodate her workplace injury and terminated her employment.

The respondent requested an adjournment of the scheduled mediation on the basis that the applicant was pursuing a WSIB appeal.

The Tribunal treated the request as a request to defer but found no basis for deferral.

The Tribunal denied the adjournment request, noting it was made outside the 14-day period following the Notice of Mediation and the respondent failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances.

Paradis v. Teppen Corporation, 2014 HRTO 194

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 11, 2014

Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as security guard at immigration holding centre is federally regulated.

The applicant, a security guard at the Toronto Immigration Holding Centre, filed an application alleging discrimination and reprisal by his employer and union.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss on the basis that the employment appeared to fall under federal jurisdiction.

Following written submissions, the Tribunal found that security services at immigration detention centres constitute an integral part of a federal undertaking, analogous to airport security.

The application was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Surinder Singh Pama v. G4S Secure Solutions (Canada) Ltd., 2014 HRTO 190

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 10, 2014

Hearing adjourned due to respondent's serious illness; respondents ordered to complete pre-hearing disclosure.

The individual respondents requested an adjournment of the hearing because one of them was diagnosed with a serious illness and required surgery.

The applicant opposed the request, noting the respondents' failure to comply with pre-hearing disclosure obligations.

The Tribunal granted the adjournment, finding the medical circumstances extraordinary, but ordered the respondents to comply with their disclosure obligations under Rules 16 and 17 within 21 days.

Gubrenko v. T.O.J. Empire Auto, 2014 HRTO 186

Claudio Martini

22 cases2002–2014

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 31, 2014

Adjournment of preliminary hearing granted due to sudden illness of the individual respondent.

The respondents requested an adjournment of a preliminary hearing because the individual respondent, who had carriage of the matter, fell ill the night before.

The applicant opposed the request, citing delay and prejudice.

The Tribunal granted the brief adjournment, finding that it would be unfair to require the respondents to proceed given the sudden illness and the lack of time for their newly instructed counsel to prepare.

Tammy Caron v. Lakeside Plastics Limited and Ken Siddall, 2014 HRTO 141

Taylor Ransom

Practising Law - Employed3 cases2014–2014

Raj Anand

54 cases1981–2017

Katharine Montpetit

Practising Law - Employed6 cases2014–2015

Danielle Bisnar

29 cases2012–2024

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 30, 2014

Hearing bifurcated to separate liability and remedy, but liability issues against all respondents heard together.

The respondent College of Nurses of Ontario requested an order to bifurcate the hearing into three phases, separating the allegations against the College from those against Ontario, and separating liability from remedy.

The applicant opposed the request, arguing the issues were intertwined.

The Tribunal found that the liability issues against both respondents were intertwined and should be heard together to avoid duplicating evidence.

However, given the complex and unusual remedies sought, the Tribunal ordered the hearing bifurcated into two stages: liability first, followed by remedy if necessary.

Ryan v. College of Nurses of Ontario, 2014 HRTO 139

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 27, 2014

Human rights application dismissed at preliminary stage for failing to identify specific acts of discrimination.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination with respect to goods, services, and facilities based on race, colour, age, and association.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss because the application failed to identify specific acts of discrimination committed by the respondent school board.

Despite being directed to provide written submissions, the applicant failed to explain how the described incidents amounted to discrimination under the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding it plain and obvious that it did not fall within its jurisdiction.

Campbell v. Durham District School Board, 2014 HRTO 119

Jessica Amey

31 cases2013–2026

Christopher Sinal

7 cases2013–2018

Douglas Sanderson

In Private Practice40 cases2010–2025

Tribunal dismisses discrimination claims but allows reprisal allegations to proceed to a merits hearing.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment based on ethnic origin, marital status, and reprisal.

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

The Tribunal dismissed the allegations of discrimination based on ethnic origin and marital status, finding no evidence connecting the alleged unfair treatment to a protected ground.

However, the Tribunal allowed the reprisal allegations regarding the suspension of the applicant's work email and phone access, and the alleged refusal to complete insurance forms, to proceed to a merits hearing.

The Tribunal also added Wharncliffe Walk-In Clinic Ltd. and Dr. Derek Chiu as respondents, while declining to remove Pellark Dental Centre and the individual respondent.

Angelica Tesseris v. Pellark Dental Centre, Wharncliffe Walk-In Clinic Ltd., Dr. Derek Chiu and Kim Sanzosti, 2014 CanLII 2450

Michelle Gibbs

Douglas Sanderson

Reprisal application dismissed at summary hearing for lack of jurisdiction and no reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging reprisal in employment against the respondent, who was in-house counsel for the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario.

The respondent had sent a letter asserting that evidence from a College discipline hearing could not be used in the applicant's separate human rights application.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing and dismissed the application, finding it had no reasonable prospect of success because the alleged retaliation was not related to the enforcement of human rights, and the relationship between the parties did not fall within a protected social area under the Code.

Tesseris v. Amey, 2014 HRTO 102

Douglas Sanderson

Request for interim reinstatement denied; applicant failed to establish necessity or balance of convenience.

The applicant filed an Application alleging discrimination and reprisal in employment, and requested an interim remedy of immediate reinstatement to her role as Chief Compliance Officer.

The Tribunal denied the request for an interim remedy, finding that the applicant failed to establish that the balance of convenience favoured granting the remedy or that reinstatement would be unavailable at the end of the hearing absent the interim order.

Kaura v. Pacific Investment Management Company (LLC) – PIMCO LLC, 2014 HRTO 98

Mandy Fricot

8 cases2009–2014

Douglas Sanderson

In Private Practice15 cases2012–2025

Adjournment request denied; applicant failed to establish mother's illness prevented hearing preparation.

The applicant requested an adjournment of the scheduled hearing because his mother was seriously ill in the hospital.

The respondent did not oppose the request but asked that any rescheduled dates be convenient for all parties.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the illness of a family member who is not a party or witness only warrants an adjournment in extraordinary circumstances where it prevents the party from attending or preparing for the hearing.

The applicant failed to provide sufficient detail to establish such circumstances.

Samuel Pervais v. Dilicio Anishinabek Family Care, 2014 HRTO 94

Sunira Chaudhri

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 21, 2014

Adjournment request denied as respondents failed to show exceptional circumstances for counsel and witness unavailability.

The respondents requested an adjournment of a scheduled hearing before the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, citing counsel's double-booked schedule and the unavailability of key witnesses who were out of the country.

The applicant opposed the request.

The Tribunal denied the adjournment, finding that the respondents failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances as required by the Tribunal's Practice Direction, given that they had six months' notice of the hearing dates and provided inadequate explanations for the scheduling conflicts and witness unavailability.

Khan v. 1742248 Ontario Inc., 2014 HRTO 86

Andrea Gonsalves

In Private Practice99 cases2009–2026

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 13, 2014

Request for reconsideration dismissed as applicant failed to establish compelling and extraordinary circumstances.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a previous decision that dismissed his human rights application for delay.

The Tribunal held a conference call to hear oral submissions.

The applicant argued that the application was not untimely and that the Vice-chair erred in dismissing it.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to establish any of the grounds for reconsideration under Rule 26.5, as reconsideration is not an appeal or an opportunity to re-argue alleged errors.

The request for reconsideration was dismissed.

Sivanadian v. Law Society of Upper Canada, 2014 HRTO 47

Michele Wright

30 cases2008–2021

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 6, 2014

Reconsideration of dismissed human rights application denied where applicant failed to justify failure to respond.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination by police officers who apprehended him under the Mental Health Act.

The application was previously dismissed as abandoned after the applicant failed to respond to a Notice of Request to Dismiss.

The applicant sought reconsideration, arguing that he was under house arrest and lacked access to a computer or phone to respond.

During the teleconference hearing, the applicant made inappropriate comments and alleged bias against the adjudicator.

The Tribunal dismissed the bias allegation and denied the reconsideration request, finding that the applicant was capable of communicating with the Tribunal in writing or by phone during the relevant period but failed to request an extension.

Grant Hutchinson v. Toronto Police Services Board, 2014 HRTO 6

Greg Bullen

50 cases2009–2019

Douglas Sanderson

In Private Practice7 cases2009–2016

Human rights application dismissed at summary hearing for lacking a reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant, who receives WSIB benefits for a workplace injury, filed a human rights application alleging discrimination based on disability and reprisal by the WSIB and its employees.

The applicant claimed the respondents delayed home renovations, acted abusively, and retaliated against him for seeking assistance from outside agencies.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing and dismissed the application, finding no reasonable prospect of success.

The reprisal allegations related to the enforcement of rights under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, not the Human Rights Code, and the applicant provided no evidence linking the alleged unfair treatment to his disability.

Hale v. Workplace Safety Insurance Board, 2013 HRTO 2121

Sarah Eves

Douglas Sanderson

Applicant ordered to produce complete medical file and detailed witness statements prior to hearing.

The respondent requested an order during proceedings compelling the applicant to produce a complete copy of her family physician's medical file and to provide detailed witness statements in compliance with the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The applicant did not respond to the request.

The Tribunal found that the respondent had a reasonable basis for concern regarding the completeness of the medical file and that the applicant's witness statements were inadequate.

The Tribunal ordered the applicant to immediately produce the requested documents and detailed witness statements, failing which the Tribunal may take further steps under Rule 5.

Maria Villena v. Canadian Blood Services, 2013 HRTO 2120

Paul Meier

115 cases2006–2026

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioDec 20, 2013

Tribunal denies overly broad document production request and orders scheduling of a two-day hearing.

The applicant in a human rights proceeding requested an order requiring the respondent to produce 2,001 e-mail messages from 2009 to the present containing his name.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding it overly broad and noting the applicant failed to establish the arguable relevance of the documents to the issues in dispute, which arose in early 2012.

The Tribunal also granted the respondent's request to schedule a two-day hearing in Toronto, as the applicant had not provided medical information supporting his previous requests for accommodation regarding the hearing's duration, location, or format.

Ronald Ihasz v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Revenue, 2013 HRTO 2112

Sara Erskine

8 cases2006–2013

Ryan Conlin

6 cases2011–2013

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioDec 19, 2013

Human rights application dismissed; equalizing accommodated work hours and imposing legitimate discipline did not violate Code.

The applicant, a part-time employee who suffered a workplace injury, alleged discrimination on the basis of disability and reprisal after the employer reduced her hours of work and subsequently disciplined her.

The employer had initially accommodated the applicant by providing her with more hours in a modified position than another employee with similar restrictions to avoid paying WSIB Loss of Earnings benefits.

The employer later equalized the hours between the two accommodated employees, resulting in a reduction of the applicant's hours.

The Tribunal found that equalizing the hours did not constitute discrimination and that the employer was not required to maintain unnecessary work.

The Tribunal also dismissed the reprisal allegations, finding that the discipline imposed for attendance policy violations and inappropriate workplace comments was based on legitimate concerns and lacked retaliatory intent.

Chadwick v. Norfolk (County), 2013 HRTO 2101

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioNov 27, 2013

Application dismissed at preliminary stage as reprisal allegations were highly speculative and beyond Tribunal's jurisdiction.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination with respect to employment because of reprisal.

She claimed the respondent failed to interview her for two positions in retaliation for a human rights complaint she filed against a different employer 11 years prior.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss, noting the application did not appear to raise an issue within its jurisdiction.

Finding the applicant's allegations highly speculative and amounting to a bare assertion, the Tribunal dismissed the application at a preliminary stage as it was plain and obvious it fell outside its jurisdiction.

Finlay v. Office of Legislative Assembly of Ontario, 2013 HRTO 1962

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

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 14, 2014

Human rights application deferred pending completion of concurrent union grievance process.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging the respondent failed to accommodate his disability by refusing to transfer him to another department after a medical leave.

The respondent requested deferral because the applicant's union had filed a grievance based on the same facts and human rights issues.

Burai v. 2095527 Ontario Ltd., 2014 HRTO 197

Ron Franklin

23 cases2009–2026

Carissa Tanzola

In Private Practice6 cases2011–2014

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 13, 2014

Request to reactivate deferred human rights application denied; request to amend application granted.

The applicant requested to reactivate his human rights application, which had been deferred pending the outcome of a WSIB proceeding, and to amend the application to include new allegations.

The Tribunal denied the request to reactivate, finding that the WSIB proceeding had not been unduly prolonged and that concurrent proceedings would risk inconsistent decisions.

The Tribunal granted the unopposed request to amend the application.

Sujnarine Samaroo v. Victaulic Company of Canada Limited, 2014 HRTO 200

Dawn Phillips-Brown

12 cases2014–2024

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 12, 2014

Request to adjourn mediation denied as it was untimely and lacked exceptional circumstances.

The respondent requested an adjournment of the scheduled mediation on the basis that the applicant was pursuing a WSIB appeal.

The Tribunal treated the request as a request to defer but found no basis for deferral.

The Tribunal denied the adjournment request, noting it was made outside the 14-day period following the Notice of Mediation and the respondent failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances.

Paradis v. Teppen Corporation, 2014 HRTO 194

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 11, 2014

Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as security guard at immigration holding centre is federally regulated.

The applicant, a security guard at the Toronto Immigration Holding Centre, filed an application alleging discrimination and reprisal by his employer and union.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss on the basis that the employment appeared to fall under federal jurisdiction.

Following written submissions, the Tribunal found that security services at immigration detention centres constitute an integral part of a federal undertaking, analogous to airport security.

The application was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Surinder Singh Pama v. G4S Secure Solutions (Canada) Ltd., 2014 HRTO 190

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 10, 2014

Hearing adjourned due to respondent's serious illness; respondents ordered to complete pre-hearing disclosure.

The individual respondents requested an adjournment of the hearing because one of them was diagnosed with a serious illness and required surgery.

The applicant opposed the request, noting the respondents' failure to comply with pre-hearing disclosure obligations.

The Tribunal granted the adjournment, finding the medical circumstances extraordinary, but ordered the respondents to comply with their disclosure obligations under Rules 16 and 17 within 21 days.

Gubrenko v. T.O.J. Empire Auto, 2014 HRTO 186

Claudio Martini

22 cases2002–2014

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 31, 2014

Adjournment of preliminary hearing granted due to sudden illness of the individual respondent.

The respondents requested an adjournment of a preliminary hearing because the individual respondent, who had carriage of the matter, fell ill the night before.

The applicant opposed the request, citing delay and prejudice.

Tammy Caron v. Lakeside Plastics Limited and Ken Siddall, 2014 HRTO 141

Taylor Ransom

Practising Law - Employed3 cases2014–2014

Raj Anand

54 cases1981–2017

Katharine Montpetit

Practising Law - Employed6 cases2014–2015

Danielle Bisnar

29 cases2012–2024

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 30, 2014

Hearing bifurcated to separate liability and remedy, but liability issues against all respondents heard together.

The applicant opposed the request, arguing the issues were intertwined.

The Tribunal found that the liability issues against both respondents were intertwined and should be heard together to avoid duplicating evidence.

However, given the complex and unusual remedies sought, the Tribunal ordered the hearing bifurcated into two stages: liability first, followed by remedy if necessary.

Ryan v. College of Nurses of Ontario, 2014 HRTO 139

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 27, 2014

Human rights application dismissed at preliminary stage for failing to identify specific acts of discrimination.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination with respect to goods, services, and facilities based on race, colour, age, and association.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss because the application failed to identify specific acts of discrimination committed by the respondent school board.

Despite being directed to provide written submissions, the applicant failed to explain how the described incidents amounted to discrimination under the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding it plain and obvious that it did not fall within its jurisdiction.

Campbell v. Durham District School Board, 2014 HRTO 119

Jessica Amey

31 cases2013–2026

Christopher Sinal

7 cases2013–2018

Douglas Sanderson

In Private Practice40 cases2010–2025

Tribunal dismisses discrimination claims but allows reprisal allegations to proceed to a merits hearing.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment based on ethnic origin, marital status, and reprisal.

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

The Tribunal dismissed the allegations of discrimination based on ethnic origin and marital status, finding no evidence connecting the alleged unfair treatment to a protected ground.

The Tribunal also added Wharncliffe Walk-In Clinic Ltd. and Dr. Derek Chiu as respondents, while declining to remove Pellark Dental Centre and the individual respondent.

Angelica Tesseris v. Pellark Dental Centre, Wharncliffe Walk-In Clinic Ltd., Dr. Derek Chiu and Kim Sanzosti, 2014 CanLII 2450

Michelle Gibbs

Douglas Sanderson

Reprisal application dismissed at summary hearing for lack of jurisdiction and no reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging reprisal in employment against the respondent, who was in-house counsel for the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario.

The respondent had sent a letter asserting that evidence from a College discipline hearing could not be used in the applicant's separate human rights application.

Tesseris v. Amey, 2014 HRTO 102

Douglas Sanderson

Request for interim reinstatement denied; applicant failed to establish necessity or balance of convenience.

The applicant filed an Application alleging discrimination and reprisal in employment, and requested an interim remedy of immediate reinstatement to her role as Chief Compliance Officer.

Kaura v. Pacific Investment Management Company (LLC) – PIMCO LLC, 2014 HRTO 98

Mandy Fricot

8 cases2009–2014

Douglas Sanderson

In Private Practice15 cases2012–2025

Adjournment request denied; applicant failed to establish mother's illness prevented hearing preparation.

The applicant requested an adjournment of the scheduled hearing because his mother was seriously ill in the hospital.

The respondent did not oppose the request but asked that any rescheduled dates be convenient for all parties.

The applicant failed to provide sufficient detail to establish such circumstances.

Samuel Pervais v. Dilicio Anishinabek Family Care, 2014 HRTO 94

Sunira Chaudhri

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 21, 2014

Adjournment request denied as respondents failed to show exceptional circumstances for counsel and witness unavailability.

The applicant opposed the request.

Khan v. 1742248 Ontario Inc., 2014 HRTO 86

Andrea Gonsalves

In Private Practice99 cases2009–2026

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 13, 2014

Request for reconsideration dismissed as applicant failed to establish compelling and extraordinary circumstances.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a previous decision that dismissed his human rights application for delay.

The Tribunal held a conference call to hear oral submissions.

The applicant argued that the application was not untimely and that the Vice-chair erred in dismissing it.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to establish any of the grounds for reconsideration under Rule 26.5, as reconsideration is not an appeal or an opportunity to re-argue alleged errors.

The request for reconsideration was dismissed.

Sivanadian v. Law Society of Upper Canada, 2014 HRTO 47

Michele Wright

30 cases2008–2021

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 6, 2014

Reconsideration of dismissed human rights application denied where applicant failed to justify failure to respond.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination by police officers who apprehended him under the Mental Health Act.

The application was previously dismissed as abandoned after the applicant failed to respond to a Notice of Request to Dismiss.

The applicant sought reconsideration, arguing that he was under house arrest and lacked access to a computer or phone to respond.

During the teleconference hearing, the applicant made inappropriate comments and alleged bias against the adjudicator.

Grant Hutchinson v. Toronto Police Services Board, 2014 HRTO 6

Greg Bullen

50 cases2009–2019

Douglas Sanderson

In Private Practice7 cases2009–2016

Human rights application dismissed at summary hearing for lacking a reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant, who receives WSIB benefits for a workplace injury, filed a human rights application alleging discrimination based on disability and reprisal by the WSIB and its employees.

The applicant claimed the respondents delayed home renovations, acted abusively, and retaliated against him for seeking assistance from outside agencies.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing and dismissed the application, finding no reasonable prospect of success.

Hale v. Workplace Safety Insurance Board, 2013 HRTO 2121

Sarah Eves

Douglas Sanderson

Applicant ordered to produce complete medical file and detailed witness statements prior to hearing.

The applicant did not respond to the request.

The Tribunal found that the respondent had a reasonable basis for concern regarding the completeness of the medical file and that the applicant's witness statements were inadequate.

The Tribunal ordered the applicant to immediately produce the requested documents and detailed witness statements, failing which the Tribunal may take further steps under Rule 5.

Maria Villena v. Canadian Blood Services, 2013 HRTO 2120

Paul Meier

115 cases2006–2026

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioDec 20, 2013

Tribunal denies overly broad document production request and orders scheduling of a two-day hearing.

The applicant in a human rights proceeding requested an order requiring the respondent to produce 2,001 e-mail messages from 2009 to the present containing his name.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding it overly broad and noting the applicant failed to establish the arguable relevance of the documents to the issues in dispute, which arose in early 2012.

Ronald Ihasz v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Revenue, 2013 HRTO 2112

Sara Erskine

8 cases2006–2013

Ryan Conlin

6 cases2011–2013

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioDec 19, 2013

Human rights application dismissed; equalizing accommodated work hours and imposing legitimate discipline did not violate Code.

The employer later equalized the hours between the two accommodated employees, resulting in a reduction of the applicant's hours.

The Tribunal found that equalizing the hours did not constitute discrimination and that the employer was not required to maintain unnecessary work.

Chadwick v. Norfolk (County), 2013 HRTO 2101

Douglas Sanderson