Douglas Sanderson

Tribunal declines to dismiss application for delay but requests submissions on bankruptcy stay.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, claiming he was terminated after a workplace accident.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss for delay, as the application was filed more than one year after the termination.

The applicant provided written submissions explaining he was waiting for his union to resolve his grievances based on legal advice.

The Tribunal found it was not plain and obvious that the application should be dismissed for delay.

However, the Tribunal noted the respondent had filed a Notice of Intention to Make a Proposal under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, which stays proceedings.

The applicant was directed to provide submissions on whether the stay is still in place.

Nicholas v. Web Offset Publications Limited, 2013 HRTO 1507

Sven Poysa

17 cases2008–2016

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application against federally-regulated bank dismissed for lack of provincial jurisdiction.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability against JP Morgan Chase & Co. The respondent requested dismissal on the basis that it is a federally-regulated bank under the Bank Act, and therefore falls under exclusive federal jurisdiction pursuant to s. 91(15) of the Constitution Act, 1867.

The applicant did not respond to the request.

The Tribunal found that the matter falls exclusively under federal jurisdiction and dismissed the application.

Bole v. JP Morgan Chase & Co., 2013 HRTO 1506

Douglas Sanderson

Tribunal directs parties to provide submissions on deferring application pending concurrent College proceedings.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination with respect to goods, services, and facilities because of disability during her hospitalization at the respondent hospital.

The Tribunal noted that the applicant had also filed complaints with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario regarding some of the same incidents.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision directing the parties to provide written submissions on whether the application should be deferred pending the completion of the College proceedings.

Stina Aurelia v. Grand River Hospital, 2013 HRTO 1505

Kate Sellar

26 cases2009–2016

Douglas Sanderson

In Private Practice6 cases2013–2017

Request to add individual and organizational respondents denied for lack of compelling reason and adequate basis.

The applicant filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings to add the respondent's president as an individual respondent and a numbered company as an organizational respondent.

The Tribunal applied the Smyth test and found no compelling reason to add the individual respondent, as there were no allegations of harassment or actions outside the scope of employment for which the organizational respondent would not be vicariously liable.

The Tribunal also found an inadequate basis to add the numbered company, instead directing the respondent to clarify its legal identity.

The request was denied.

Derek Walton v. Greenestone Clinic Muskoka Inc., 2013 HRTO 1495

Respondents permitted to amend Response to address new allegations raised in applicant's Reply.

The respondents filed a Request for an Order During Proceeding, seeking to either require the applicant to amend his Application to include new allegations raised in his Reply, or to permit the respondents to amend their Response to address those new allegations.

The applicant consented to the respondents amending their Response.

The Tribunal found that allowing the respondents to amend their Response was the most practical approach and granted the request.

Prothero v. Ontario (Community Safety and Corrections Services), 2013 HRTO 1493

Lynette D’Souza

17 cases2013–2017

John Yach

Douglas Sanderson

Tribunal denies requests to remove personal respondents, amend pleadings, and order premature document disclosure.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal based on disability.

The respondents requested the removal of the individual respondents and the amendment of the application to exclude references to certain e-mail messages.

The applicant requested an order for document disclosure.

The Tribunal denied the respondents' request, finding compelling reasons to keep the individual respondents as parties and noting the e-mails were arguably relevant.

The Tribunal also denied the applicant's request for disclosure as premature.

Prothero v. Ontario (Community Safety and Corrections Services), 2013 HRTO 1491

Sarah Crossley

14 cases2007–2015

Raj Anand

54 cases1981–2017

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 29, 2013

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

The applicant, a nurse, alleged that her employer and the nursing regulatory college discriminated against her and engaged in reprisal.

The employer placed the applicant on medical leave after she exhibited concerning behaviour and made allegations of patient abuse.

The college subsequently suspended her certificate of registration after finding her incapacitated due to a psychotic disorder.

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

The applicant's reprisal claims failed because reporting patient abuse is not an enforcement of a human rights right, and her disability discrimination claims failed because the employer's actions in placing her on leave due to perceived incapacity were not discriminatory.

Kissoon v. Victorian Order of Nurses, 2013 HRTO 1479

Lisa Riegel

Practising Law - Employed3 cases2013–2013

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 28, 2013

Tribunal declined to defer human rights application as the related provincial offences trial had already occurred.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination with respect to goods, services, and facilities after attempting to get permission to modify his property in a heritage conservation district.

The Tribunal directed the parties to make submissions on whether the application should be deferred pending the retrial of charges against the applicant under the Ontario Heritage Act for paving his backyard without a permit.

The Tribunal declined to defer the application, noting that the retrial was scheduled for a date that had already passed, meaning there was no concurrent proceeding to defer to.

Ardalan Robati v. The Corporation of the City of Markham, 2013 HRTO 1463

Paul Pingue

3 cases2013–2015

Christopher Bittle

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 25, 2013

Human rights application dismissed at summary hearing as applicant failed to link termination to disability.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, claiming the respondent failed to accommodate his post-concussion syndrome by requiring him to work alone, which led to his termination.

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

The Tribunal found that the applicant's medical restrictions did not state he could not work alone, and there was no evidence linking his difficulties during the shift to his disability.

The application was dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success.

Patrick Berti v. Complex Services Inc., 2013 HRTO 1304

Alex Van Kralingen

28 cases2008–2025

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application deferred pending resolution of concurrent appeals before the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal after being banned from the respondents' medical clinic.

The applicant had also filed complaints with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario and the College of Nurses of Ontario regarding the same incidents, and subsequently appealed to the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board (HPARB).

The respondents requested that the Tribunal defer the application pending the HPARB proceedings.

The Tribunal found significant overlap in the factual issues and deferred the application to avoid the possibility of inconsistent decisions.

Randy King v. MCI Medical Clinics Inc., 2013 HRTO 1284

Lisa Fineberg

Craig Lawrence

8 cases2011–2024

Agnes Wintersinger

2 cases2013–2014

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction over federally regulated employer and union.

The applicant, a bus driver, alleged discrimination and reprisal after being dismissed for using a corporate credit card for personal expenses.

She claimed her dismissal was retaliation for a lengthy absence due to a workplace injury and that the WSIB's delays caused her extended absence.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing and dismissed the application.

It found that the employer and union were federally regulated entities outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction, and that the applicant failed to point to any evidence connecting the WSIB's actions to a prohibited ground of discrimination.

Edith Bell-LaFlamme v. Trentway Wager / Coach Canada, 2013 HRTO 1283

Justin Ellert

Practising Law - Employed18 cases2012–2017

Fatema Dada

Elizabeth Montpetit

In Private Practice1 case2013–2013

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 22, 2013

Human rights application regarding child apprehension dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant alleged discrimination on the basis of disability, family status, and association after her children were apprehended by a children's aid society with police assistance, following a hospital visit where a doctor reported concerns about her mental health and denial of care to her child.

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

The Tribunal found that the respondents were acting pursuant to their duties under the Child and Family Services Act and that the applicant provided no evidence connecting their actions to a prohibited ground of discrimination.

The application was dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success.

C.G. v. Timmins Police Service, 2013 HRTO 1268

Brian O'Byrne

20 cases1983–2016

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 18, 2013

Request to reactivate deferred human rights application denied pending clarification of related union grievance arbitration.

The applicant requested the reactivation of his human rights application, which had been deferred pending the outcome of a union grievance regarding a three-day disciplinary suspension.

The applicant argued that no such grievance existed, while the respondent maintained that the grievance was proceeding to arbitration.

The Tribunal found it remained unclear whether the grievance proceeding to arbitration dealt with the suspension in question.

Given the respondent's submission that the grievance would likely be litigated soon, the Tribunal denied the request to reactivate and ordered the application to remain deferred, directing the parties to report on the status of the grievance by a specified date.

Sheehan v. Mauser Canada, 2013 HRTO 1256

Mark Mikulasik

In Private Practice3 cases2013–2018

Jamie McGinnis

20 cases2012–2026

Douglas Sanderson

Tribunal permits individual respondent to amend Response but refuses to remove her as a party.

The individual respondent in a human rights application brought two requests for an order during proceedings: one to amend her Response, and another to remove herself as a personal respondent.

The Tribunal granted the request to amend, noting it was made at an early stage and caused no prejudice.

However, the Tribunal denied the request to remove the individual respondent, finding that because the organizational respondent disputed vicarious liability for the alleged reprisals, removing the individual respondent could leave the applicant without a remedy.

Wozniczka v. The Polish Mutual Benefit Society, 2013 HRTO 1206

Douglas Sanderson

Grocery store and cashier ordered to pay $2,000 for racist comment directed at customer.

The applicant, a Black man, alleged discrimination with respect to services after a cashier at the respondent grocery store referred to him as a "monkey" in Mandarin.

The Tribunal found the applicant's wife's testimony credible that the cashier made the racist comment after the applicant complained about bagging his own groceries.

The Tribunal held that the comment constituted discrimination based on race and colour.

The organizational respondent was found vicariously liable and failed to adequately investigate the applicant's complaint.

The Tribunal awarded $2,000 in compensation for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect, apportioned between the individual and organizational respondents, and ordered human rights training.

Adorgloh v. Seasons Foodmart and Feng Lin, 2013 HRTO 1201

Jessica Young

8 cases2012–2015

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 9, 2013

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to dismissal request.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment based on record of offences.

The respondent requested dismissal of the application on the basis that the applicant had signed a full and final release.

The Tribunal directed the applicant to file submissions in response to the request to dismiss, warning that failure to do so could result in the application being deemed abandoned.

The applicant failed to file any submissions.

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

David Mullett v. Benteler Automotive Canada, 2013 HRTO 1194

Elizabeth Nurse

Practising Law - Employed37 cases1994–2024

Douglas Sanderson

Union granted intervenor status in unopposed request regarding disability discrimination application.

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

The Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 4153, requested to intervene on the basis that the outcome could affect bargaining unit employees and matters covered by the collective agreement.

As neither the applicant nor the respondents opposed the request, the Tribunal granted the union intervenor status.

Maureen Johnson v. Hamilton Wentworth District School Board and Daniel Chiarcos, 2013 HRTO 1181

Douglas Sanderson

Application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Tribunal's request for status update.

The Tribunal had previously deferred the application pending the conclusion of a union grievance proceeding.

The Tribunal sent a letter requesting a status update and warned that the application could be dismissed as abandoned if the applicant failed to respond within 30 days.

The applicant did not respond.

As a result, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Collins v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2013 HRTO 1179

Donald B. Bayne

8 cases1980–2013

Douglas Sanderson

Practising Law - Employed1 case2013–2013

Motion to remove individual respondents denied as corporation is not vicariously liable for workplace harassment.

The respondents requested the removal of several individual respondents from a human rights application alleging discrimination and harassment based on disability.

The corporate respondent, Homestead Land Holdings Limited, argued it had accepted vicarious liability and there was no compelling reason to keep the individuals as parties.

The Tribunal declined to remove the individual respondents, noting that under section 46.3(1) of the Human Rights Code, a corporation is not vicariously liable for workplace harassment under section 5(2).

Removing the individuals would leave the applicant without a remedy for the harassment allegations.

One individual respondent was removed on consent.

Trevors v. Homestead Land Holdings Limited, 2013 HRTO 1176

Catherine Conrad

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 4, 2013

Tribunal dismissed request for summary hearing and directed submissions on deferral pending related court proceedings.

The applicant alleged discrimination with respect to goods, services and facilities because of race, colour and citizenship after the respondent denied him permission to make alterations to his home in a heritage conservation district.

The respondent requested that the Application be dismissed under s. 45.1 of the Human Rights Code because the applicant was convicted under the Ontario Heritage Act for paving his backyard without a permit, or alternatively, that a summary hearing be held.

The Tribunal dismissed the request for a summary hearing and directed the parties to make submissions on whether the Application should be deferred pending the applicant's appeal of his conviction before the Ontario Court of Justice.

Robati v. The Corporation of the City of Markham, 2013 HRTO 1162

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

Tribunal declines to dismiss application for delay but requests submissions on bankruptcy stay.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, claiming he was terminated after a workplace accident.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss for delay, as the application was filed more than one year after the termination.

The applicant provided written submissions explaining he was waiting for his union to resolve his grievances based on legal advice.

The Tribunal found it was not plain and obvious that the application should be dismissed for delay.

However, the Tribunal noted the respondent had filed a Notice of Intention to Make a Proposal under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, which stays proceedings.

The applicant was directed to provide submissions on whether the stay is still in place.

Nicholas v. Web Offset Publications Limited, 2013 HRTO 1507

Sven Poysa

17 cases2008–2016

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application against federally-regulated bank dismissed for lack of provincial jurisdiction.

The applicant did not respond to the request.

The Tribunal found that the matter falls exclusively under federal jurisdiction and dismissed the application.

Bole v. JP Morgan Chase & Co., 2013 HRTO 1506

Douglas Sanderson

Tribunal directs parties to provide submissions on deferring application pending concurrent College proceedings.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination with respect to goods, services, and facilities because of disability during her hospitalization at the respondent hospital.

The Tribunal noted that the applicant had also filed complaints with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario regarding some of the same incidents.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision directing the parties to provide written submissions on whether the application should be deferred pending the completion of the College proceedings.

Stina Aurelia v. Grand River Hospital, 2013 HRTO 1505

Kate Sellar

26 cases2009–2016

Douglas Sanderson

In Private Practice6 cases2013–2017

Request to add individual and organizational respondents denied for lack of compelling reason and adequate basis.

The applicant filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings to add the respondent's president as an individual respondent and a numbered company as an organizational respondent.

The Tribunal also found an inadequate basis to add the numbered company, instead directing the respondent to clarify its legal identity.

The request was denied.

Derek Walton v. Greenestone Clinic Muskoka Inc., 2013 HRTO 1495

Lynette D’Souza

17 cases2013–2017

John Yach

Douglas Sanderson

In Private Practice6 cases2013–2017

Respondents permitted to amend Response to address new allegations raised in applicant's Reply.

The applicant consented to the respondents amending their Response.

The Tribunal found that allowing the respondents to amend their Response was the most practical approach and granted the request.

Prothero v. Ontario (Community Safety and Corrections Services), 2013 HRTO 1493

Lynette D’Souza

17 cases2013–2017

John Yach

Douglas Sanderson

Tribunal denies requests to remove personal respondents, amend pleadings, and order premature document disclosure.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal based on disability.

The respondents requested the removal of the individual respondents and the amendment of the application to exclude references to certain e-mail messages.

The applicant requested an order for document disclosure.

The Tribunal denied the respondents' request, finding compelling reasons to keep the individual respondents as parties and noting the e-mails were arguably relevant.

The Tribunal also denied the applicant's request for disclosure as premature.

Prothero v. Ontario (Community Safety and Corrections Services), 2013 HRTO 1491

Sarah Crossley

14 cases2007–2015

Raj Anand

54 cases1981–2017

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 29, 2013

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

The applicant, a nurse, alleged that her employer and the nursing regulatory college discriminated against her and engaged in reprisal.

The employer placed the applicant on medical leave after she exhibited concerning behaviour and made allegations of patient abuse.

The college subsequently suspended her certificate of registration after finding her incapacitated due to a psychotic disorder.

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

Kissoon v. Victorian Order of Nurses, 2013 HRTO 1479

Lisa Riegel

Practising Law - Employed3 cases2013–2013

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 28, 2013

Tribunal declined to defer human rights application as the related provincial offences trial had already occurred.

The Tribunal declined to defer the application, noting that the retrial was scheduled for a date that had already passed, meaning there was no concurrent proceeding to defer to.

Ardalan Robati v. The Corporation of the City of Markham, 2013 HRTO 1463

Paul Pingue

3 cases2013–2015

Christopher Bittle

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 25, 2013

Human rights application dismissed at summary hearing as applicant failed to link termination to disability.

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

The Tribunal found that the applicant's medical restrictions did not state he could not work alone, and there was no evidence linking his difficulties during the shift to his disability.

The application was dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success.

Patrick Berti v. Complex Services Inc., 2013 HRTO 1304

Alex Van Kralingen

28 cases2008–2025

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application deferred pending resolution of concurrent appeals before the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal after being banned from the respondents' medical clinic.

The respondents requested that the Tribunal defer the application pending the HPARB proceedings.

The Tribunal found significant overlap in the factual issues and deferred the application to avoid the possibility of inconsistent decisions.

Randy King v. MCI Medical Clinics Inc., 2013 HRTO 1284

Lisa Fineberg

Craig Lawrence

8 cases2011–2024

Agnes Wintersinger

2 cases2013–2014

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction over federally regulated employer and union.

The applicant, a bus driver, alleged discrimination and reprisal after being dismissed for using a corporate credit card for personal expenses.

She claimed her dismissal was retaliation for a lengthy absence due to a workplace injury and that the WSIB's delays caused her extended absence.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing and dismissed the application.

Edith Bell-LaFlamme v. Trentway Wager / Coach Canada, 2013 HRTO 1283

Justin Ellert

Practising Law - Employed18 cases2012–2017

Fatema Dada

Elizabeth Montpetit

In Private Practice1 case2013–2013

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 22, 2013

Human rights application regarding child apprehension dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success.

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

The application was dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success.

C.G. v. Timmins Police Service, 2013 HRTO 1268

Brian O'Byrne

20 cases1983–2016

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 18, 2013

Request to reactivate deferred human rights application denied pending clarification of related union grievance arbitration.

The applicant requested the reactivation of his human rights application, which had been deferred pending the outcome of a union grievance regarding a three-day disciplinary suspension.

The applicant argued that no such grievance existed, while the respondent maintained that the grievance was proceeding to arbitration.

The Tribunal found it remained unclear whether the grievance proceeding to arbitration dealt with the suspension in question.

Sheehan v. Mauser Canada, 2013 HRTO 1256

Mark Mikulasik

In Private Practice3 cases2013–2018

Jamie McGinnis

20 cases2012–2026

Douglas Sanderson

Tribunal permits individual respondent to amend Response but refuses to remove her as a party.

The individual respondent in a human rights application brought two requests for an order during proceedings: one to amend her Response, and another to remove herself as a personal respondent.

The Tribunal granted the request to amend, noting it was made at an early stage and caused no prejudice.

Wozniczka v. The Polish Mutual Benefit Society, 2013 HRTO 1206

Douglas Sanderson

Grocery store and cashier ordered to pay $2,000 for racist comment directed at customer.

The applicant, a Black man, alleged discrimination with respect to services after a cashier at the respondent grocery store referred to him as a "monkey" in Mandarin.

The Tribunal found the applicant's wife's testimony credible that the cashier made the racist comment after the applicant complained about bagging his own groceries.

The Tribunal held that the comment constituted discrimination based on race and colour.

The organizational respondent was found vicariously liable and failed to adequately investigate the applicant's complaint.

The Tribunal awarded $2,000 in compensation for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect, apportioned between the individual and organizational respondents, and ordered human rights training.

Adorgloh v. Seasons Foodmart and Feng Lin, 2013 HRTO 1201

Jessica Young

8 cases2012–2015

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 9, 2013

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to dismissal request.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment based on record of offences.

The respondent requested dismissal of the application on the basis that the applicant had signed a full and final release.

The Tribunal directed the applicant to file submissions in response to the request to dismiss, warning that failure to do so could result in the application being deemed abandoned.

The applicant failed to file any submissions.

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

David Mullett v. Benteler Automotive Canada, 2013 HRTO 1194

Elizabeth Nurse

Practising Law - Employed37 cases1994–2024

Douglas Sanderson

Union granted intervenor status in unopposed request regarding disability discrimination application.

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

The Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 4153, requested to intervene on the basis that the outcome could affect bargaining unit employees and matters covered by the collective agreement.

As neither the applicant nor the respondents opposed the request, the Tribunal granted the union intervenor status.

Maureen Johnson v. Hamilton Wentworth District School Board and Daniel Chiarcos, 2013 HRTO 1181

Douglas Sanderson

Application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Tribunal's request for status update.

The Tribunal had previously deferred the application pending the conclusion of a union grievance proceeding.

The Tribunal sent a letter requesting a status update and warned that the application could be dismissed as abandoned if the applicant failed to respond within 30 days.

The applicant did not respond.

As a result, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Collins v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2013 HRTO 1179

Donald B. Bayne

8 cases1980–2013

Douglas Sanderson

Practising Law - Employed1 case2013–2013

Motion to remove individual respondents denied as corporation is not vicariously liable for workplace harassment.

The respondents requested the removal of several individual respondents from a human rights application alleging discrimination and harassment based on disability.

The corporate respondent, Homestead Land Holdings Limited, argued it had accepted vicarious liability and there was no compelling reason to keep the individuals as parties.

Removing the individuals would leave the applicant without a remedy for the harassment allegations.

One individual respondent was removed on consent.

Trevors v. Homestead Land Holdings Limited, 2013 HRTO 1176

Catherine Conrad

Douglas Sanderson