Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMar 13, 2013

Reconsideration request dismissed as applicant failed to present evidence at the preliminary hearing.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed her human rights application as an abuse of process because she had signed a full and final release.

The applicant argued she was denied the opportunity to present oral evidence regarding the circumstances of the release at the preliminary hearing.

The Tribunal dismissed the reconsideration request, finding that the applicant had the opportunity to present evidence but failed to do so, and that this failure did not constitute new facts or a denial of procedural fairness.

Adams v. Community Life Care Inc., 2013 HRTO 428

Jonathan Maier

8 cases2012–2023

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMar 11, 2013

Applicant's request to re-open case to call medical witness denied for lack of timeliness.

During the course of a hearing, the applicant fell ill and the hearing was adjourned.

Prior to the resumption of the hearing for final submissions, the applicant requested to re-open her case to subpoena her family doctor to testify regarding doctors' notes that the respondent had previously objected to.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the applicant had ample opportunity to call her doctor during her case-in-chief and that it would not be fair, just, or expeditious to allow her to re-open her case at this late stage.

Shahenaz Alibhai v. Aditya Birla Minacs Worldwide Inc., 2013 HRTO 415

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMar 6, 2013

Tribunal orders respondent to pay settlement funds with interest after acknowledging breach of settlement.

The applicant filed an Application for Contravention of Settlement alleging the respondent failed to pay agreed-upon settlement funds.

The respondent acknowledged the breach, stating its bank account had been frozen by Revenue Canada.

The Tribunal found the respondent in breach and ordered immediate payment of the settlement funds, along with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, applying contract law principles to remedy the delay.

Diane Malabre v. LMC Endocrinology Centres (Toronto) Ltd., 2013 HRTO 385

Bettina Burgess

4 cases2012–2017

Douglas Sanderson

Tribunal cancelled oral hearing on dismissal and ordered written submissions regarding deferral of the application.

The respondent requested to convert a scheduled oral hearing regarding dismissal under section 45.1 of the Human Rights Code into a hearing on whether to defer the application, conceding that the concurrent WSIB process had not yet appropriately dealt with the substance of the application due to pending appeals.

The applicant supported addressing deferral but requested oral submissions.

The Tribunal cancelled the oral hearing, determining that a decision on deferral would not finally dispose of the application and could be efficiently addressed through written submissions.

Hastings v. ArcelorMittal Dofasco Inc., 2013 HRTO 337

Paul Meier

115 cases2006–2026

Douglas Sanderson

In Private Practice12 cases1997–2013

Motion for recusal and to reopen a withdrawn application dismissed for lack of evidence.

The applicant brought a human rights application alleging discrimination based on disability.

Following an unsuccessful mediation session, the applicant requested that the adjudicator recuse himself due to alleged bias arising from prior interim decisions and conduct during mediation.

The applicant also sought to reopen a previously withdrawn application, claiming he lacked capacity due to depression when he withdrew it.

The Tribunal dismissed the recusal request, finding no reasonable apprehension of bias, noting that making preliminary rulings does not demonstrate bias and the applicant's factual allegations regarding the mediation were unfounded.

The Tribunal also dismissed the request to reopen the withdrawn application, treating it as a request for reconsideration, because the applicant provided no medical evidence to rebut the presumption of capacity and his active participation in the litigation demonstrated his ability to make decisions.

Ihasz v. Ontario (Revenue), 2013 HRTO 333

Mark Stone

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 6, 2013

Reconsideration of dismissed human rights application denied as applicant failed to meet required criteria.

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

The original application alleged termination based on disability, but was dismissed because the applicant had signed a full and final release after accepting a severance package.

The applicant argued for reconsideration based on ongoing medical issues and dissatisfaction with the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board.

The Tribunal found that these reasons did not meet the criteria for reconsideration under Rule 26.5(d) and dismissed the request.

Michael Dieter v. Transcontinental Printing Inc./RBW Graphics, 2013 HRTO 125

David Levangie

4 cases2013–2016

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 30, 2013

Human rights application dismissed; termination found to be based on performance, not racial discrimination.

The applicant, a black man, alleged that his employment at a laundromat was terminated because of his race and colour.

He claimed the individual respondent explicitly stated he did not trust black people when firing him.

The respondents denied the allegations, asserting the applicant was dismissed due to poor performance, lack of urgency, and a poor attitude towards direction.

The Tribunal assessed the credibility of the witnesses, noting inconsistencies in the applicant's evidence and that of his partner who overheard part of the termination conversation.

The Tribunal preferred the individual respondent's evidence, finding the dismissal was based on performance and attitude, not race.

The application was dismissed.

Thompson v. 1704275 Ontario Inc., 2013 HRTO 139

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

The applicant alleged discrimination in employment based on place of origin, disability, family status, age, and reprisal against the employer and the union.

Following a summary hearing, the Tribunal found that the applicant provided no evidence linking the alleged denial of vacation or the union's handling of the grievance to a prohibited ground of discrimination.

The Tribunal also found no evidence of reprisal regarding delays in processing the claimant's pension, which were attributed to clerical errors.

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

Cann v. Slovenian Linden Foundation, 2013 HRTO 143

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 23, 2013

Request for reconsideration of decision upholding lifetime ban from respondent's facilities dismissed.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his human rights application alleging he was banned from the respondent's facilities due to his race and creed.

The applicant argued the lifetime ban was disproportionate and took issue with the Tribunal's findings of fact and failure to record the original hearing.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding no conflict with established jurisprudence and noting that reconsideration is not an appeal or an opportunity to repair deficiencies in a case.

Gavin Francisco v. The Carlu Corporation, 2013 HRTO 123

Lawrence Phillips

In Private Practice1 case2013–2013

Jamie McGinnis

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 16, 2013

Tribunal denies respondents' untimely request to change hearing venue and orders immediate compliance with disclosure obligations.

The respondents requested a change of venue for the hearing from Thunder Bay to Fort Frances, citing difficulties in securing witnesses willing to travel.

The applicant opposed the request and sought an order regarding the respondents' failure to comply with pre-hearing disclosure obligations.

The Tribunal denied the change of venue, finding the request untimely and lacking sufficient Code-related reasons.

The Tribunal also directed the respondents to immediately file their required witness statements and materials, warning of potential evidentiary sanctions for non-compliance.

Speziale v. Royal Canadian Legion Branch #29, 2013 HRTO 86

Bram Lecker

In Private Practice5 cases2003–2015

Alix Herber

7 cases2010–2016

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 11, 2013

Human rights application dismissed under section 34(11) due to concurrent civil action seeking identical remedies.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, claiming the respondents failed to accommodate his medical restrictions upon his return from a medical leave.

The respondents requested that the application be dismissed under section 34(11) of the Human Rights Code, arguing that the applicant had already commenced a civil action seeking remedies for the same alleged Code infringements.

The Tribunal found that the civil action arose from the same facts and sought remedies for the same alleged Code violations.

The Tribunal held that section 34(11) acts as a mandatory bar to the application, even though the individual respondents were not named in the civil action.

The application was dismissed.

Karl Grant v. Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Robyn Campol and Eve Buss, 2013 HRTO 59

Jamie McGinnis

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 10, 2013

Applicant permitted to amend human rights application to add reprisal allegations; respondents' representative ordered to prove standing.

The applicant filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings to amend her human rights application to add allegations of reprisals committed by the respondents after the application was filed.

The respondents' representative, who appeared to be an unlicensed third-party advocate, filed a separate request.

The Tribunal granted the applicant's request to amend, finding no prejudice to the respondents given the early stage of the proceeding.

The Tribunal also ordered the respondents' representative to identify the category or exemption that permitted him to act as a representative before the Tribunal, as he did not appear to be licensed by the Law Society of Upper Canada.

Wozniczka v. The Polish Mutual Benefit Society, 2013 HRTO 51

Cédric Lamarche

5 cases2011–2021

Andrea Sanche

2 cases2012–2013

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 8, 2013

Human rights application not barred by concurrent wrongful dismissal civil action that does not allege Code breaches.

The respondent requested the dismissal of a human rights application, arguing it was barred under section 34(11) of the Human Rights Code because the applicant had filed a civil claim based on the same facts.

The Tribunal found that the civil claim was a wrongful dismissal action seeking common law damages and did not allege any Code breaches or seek human rights remedies.

As the proceedings were not duplicative, the Tribunal retained jurisdiction and dismissed the respondent's request.

Sonia Coombs-Carpio v. Toronto Catholic School Board Employees’ Credit Union Ltd., 2013 HRTO 26

Stephen Ellis

In Private Practice11 cases2010–2024

Brent Foreman

11 cases1985–2017

Douglas Sanderson

Tribunal ordered a preliminary hearing to determine if the respondent is a federally regulated telecommunications undertaking.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability.

The respondent requested dismissal on the preliminary basis that it is a federally regulated telecommunications undertaking outside provincial jurisdiction.

Finding that the jurisdictional facts were in dispute, the Tribunal ordered an in-person preliminary hearing to receive viva voce evidence and argument on the constitutional issue.

Qbue v. Cancable Inc. c.o.b. as Dependable HomeTech, 2013 HRTO 30

Douglas Sanderson

Respondent deemed to have waived participation and accepted allegations after failing to file a Response.

The applicant filed an Application alleging discrimination in employment.

The respondent failed to file a Response despite receiving notice and a subsequent direction from the Tribunal.

Applying its established approach for such circumstances, the Tribunal ordered that the respondent is deemed to have waived all rights to notice or participation in the proceedings and to have accepted all allegations set out in the Application.

Perez-Moreno v. Kulczycki, 2013 HRTO 29

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application against Small Claims Court judge dismissed for lack of jurisdiction due to judicial immunity.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination by a Small Claims Court judge who dismissed his small claims action.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss on the basis that it lacked jurisdiction.

Applying the doctrine of judicial immunity, the Tribunal found it plain and obvious that it had no jurisdiction to hear an application based on the execution of adjudicative duties.

The application was dismissed.

Juchang Tao v. Small Claims Court of Toronto, 2013 HRTO 25

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 4, 2013

Request to reactivate deferred human rights application granted, pending submissions on effect of grievance settlement.

The applicant requested to reactivate her human rights application, which had been deferred pending the outcome of a union grievance.

The grievance was settled, but the applicant claimed the human rights issues were not addressed.

The Tribunal granted the request to proceed but ordered the applicant to file the grievance and settlement documents, and directed the parties to provide submissions on whether the application should be dismissed under section 45.1 of the Human Rights Code or as an abuse of process.

Samsam Abdulle v. National Car Rental and Alamo Rent-a-Car, 2013 HRTO 15

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 3, 2013

Respondent who failed to file a Response deemed to have waived right to participate.

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

One of the respondents failed to file a Response despite receiving notice and a subsequent Tribunal direction.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision deeming the non-responding party to have waived all rights to notice or participation in the proceedings.

However, because the other respondents filed Responses disputing the allegations, the Tribunal declined to deem the non-responding party to have accepted the allegations, requiring the applicant to prove them at the hearing.

Jesse Lorbetskie v. CCW Group of Companies Inc., Diane Benton and Derek Godbout, 2013 HRTO 6

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 2, 2013

Respondents granted 14 days to file a response to human rights application after missing initial deadline.

The applicant filed a human rights application against the respondents.

The respondents failed to file a response by the deadline set in the Notice of Application.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision warning the respondents of the consequences of failing to participate under Rule 5.5 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The respondents were granted 14 days to file a response along with an explanation for the delay, failing which the Tribunal may proceed without further notice.

Curtis v. Bloke & Forth, 2013 HRTO 7

Jo-Anne Boulding

1 case2012–2012

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioDec 19, 2012

Request for reconsideration of housing discrimination decision dismissed; no new evidence or denial of natural justice.

The respondent requested reconsideration of a Tribunal decision finding he discriminated against the applicant with respect to housing accommodation based on her receipt of public assistance.

The respondent argued he was denied natural justice because the hearing was not bifurcated as initially directed, and he sought to introduce new character evidence.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding the proposed evidence was not new or determinative, and there was no denial of natural justice as the respondent had a full opportunity to address the issue of remedy at the hearing.

Rose Janes v. Murray Wright, 2012 HRTO 2369

Affected Party

Toronto Police ServiceSelf-represented
1 appearance

Applicant

Allen BernhardtSelf-represented
1 appearance
Andrey WolkowskiSelf-represented
1 appearance
Ardalan RobatiSelf-represented
1 appearance
Bailee BuckmaterSelf-represented
1 appearance
Changhyun ParkSelf-represented
1 appearance
Clayton FullerSelf-represented
1 appearance
Coleen JacobSelf-represented
1 appearance
Diana BoltinskySelf-represented
1 appearance
Donna RyderSelf-represented
1 appearance
Emmanuel OxleySelf-represented
1 appearance
Garfield SimmsSelf-represented
1 appearance
Glenn NicholasSelf-represented
1 appearance
John GarlandSelf-represented
1 appearance
Joseph WhitwellSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kevin WerbeskiAgent
1 appearance
Lamont HunterSelf-represented
1 appearance
Leslie AustinSelf-represented
1 appearance
Lewis HoppsSelf-represented
1 appearance
Liudmila GubrenkoSelf-represented
1 appearance
Louis SterlingSelf-represented
1 appearance

Counsel

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

Counsel for the Respondent

Catherine ConradCounsel
1 appearance
Daphne FedorukCounsel
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
Rhonda HowellsAgent
4 appearances
Cecil NormanAgent
4 appearances
Danielle BisnarCounsel
4 appearances
David ArmstrongSelf-represented
4 appearances
David BakerCounsel
3 appearances
Katherine LinSelf-represented
3 appearances
Shahenaz AlibhaiSelf-represented
3 appearances
Angela ManciniAgent
3 appearances
Felix AmazanSelf-represented
3 appearances
Sachchu KhanSelf-represented
3 appearances
Christine LundyAgent
3 appearances
Kate SellarCounsel
3 appearances
C.G.Self-represented
3 appearances
Patrick JamesCounsel
3 appearances
Lorin MacDonaldCounsel
2 appearances
Louis GallinaSelf-represented
2 appearances

for the Applicants

Karen SanchezCounsel
2 appearances
E.L.Self-represented
1 appearance
Kate SellarCounsel
1 appearance
Michelle BoyceSelf-represented
1 appearance
Roger LoveCounsel
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
Mona StaplesCounsel
1 appearance
Nini JonesCounsel
1 appearance
Paul O’RyanCounsel
1 appearance
Ryan GoldvineCounsel
1 appearance
Tom RookeCounsel
1 appearance
Faisal BhabaCounsel
1 appearance
Adam WebbCounsel
1 appearance
Alana MihaljCounsel
1 appearance
Anne GregoryCounsel
1 appearance
Devon PaulCounsel
1 appearance
Elichai ShaffirCounsel
1 appearance
Elizabeth NurseCounsel
1 appearance
Geri SansonCounsel
1 appearance
Jessica AmeyCounsel
1 appearance
Kate HughesCounsel
1 appearance
Lori KentCounsel
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
Murray WrightSelf-represented
3 appearances
Kathryn BirdCounsel
3 appearances
Gita AnandCounsel
3 appearances
Jonathan MaierCounsel
3 appearances
Laura KarabulutCounsel
3 appearances
Bettina BurgessCounsel
3 appearances
Marni TolenskyCounsel
3 appearances
Brenda BowlbyCounsel
3 appearances
Mandy FricotCounsel
2 appearances
Shana FrenchCounsel
2 appearances
Sharmila ClarkCounsel
2 appearances
Kiel ArdalCounsel
2 appearances
Margot BlightCounsel
2 appearances
Brian O’ByrneCounsel
2 appearances
Carissa TanzolaCounsel
2 appearances
Steven StarkmanSelf-represented
2 appearances
Mark StoneCounsel
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

John SaundersCounsel
1 appearance
Stephanie JeronimoCounsel
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)

Daniel HuffakerCounsel
1 appearance
Carolyn Cornford GreavesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents

Nicole SmithCounsel
2 appearances
Ken MacDonaldCounsel
2 appearances
Michael RichardsCounsel
2 appearances
Patricia G. MurrayCounsel
2 appearances
Michael S. RichardsCounsel
2 appearances
Lynette D’SouzaCounsel
2 appearances
Tina EarlCounsel
2 appearances
Greg BullenCounsel
2 appearances
Sunira ChaudhriCounsel
2 appearances
Leslie FrattolinCounsel
2 appearances
Jonathan DyeCounsel
1 appearance
Jonathan MaierCounsel
1 appearance
Joseph JordanaCounsel
1 appearance
Judit SchonwaldAgent
1 appearance
Kathleen StokesCounsel
1 appearance
Kathryn BirdCounsel
1 appearance
Kenny YauAgent
1 appearance
Kyla FairCounsel
1 appearance
Laura CassianiCounsel
1 appearance
Lawrence PhillipsCounsel
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

Michelle GibbsCounsel
1 appearance
Monica TessierCounsel
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
Herman GrewalSelf-represented
1 appearance
Iain DonnellCounsel
1 appearance
Joyce TravagliniAgent
1 appearance
Paula RusakCounsel
1 appearance
Said KarimiSelf-represented
1 appearance
Steven WilsonCounsel
1 appearance

Respondents

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

Self-represented

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

Jeffrey Robles

Practising Law - Employed3 cases2012–2015

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMar 13, 2013

Reconsideration request dismissed as applicant failed to present evidence at the preliminary hearing.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed her human rights application as an abuse of process because she had signed a full and final release.

The applicant argued she was denied the opportunity to present oral evidence regarding the circumstances of the release at the preliminary hearing.

Adams v. Community Life Care Inc., 2013 HRTO 428

Jonathan Maier

8 cases2012–2023

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMar 11, 2013

Applicant's request to re-open case to call medical witness denied for lack of timeliness.

During the course of a hearing, the applicant fell ill and the hearing was adjourned.

Shahenaz Alibhai v. Aditya Birla Minacs Worldwide Inc., 2013 HRTO 415

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMar 6, 2013

Tribunal orders respondent to pay settlement funds with interest after acknowledging breach of settlement.

The applicant filed an Application for Contravention of Settlement alleging the respondent failed to pay agreed-upon settlement funds.

The respondent acknowledged the breach, stating its bank account had been frozen by Revenue Canada.

Diane Malabre v. LMC Endocrinology Centres (Toronto) Ltd., 2013 HRTO 385

Bettina Burgess

4 cases2012–2017

Douglas Sanderson

Tribunal cancelled oral hearing on dismissal and ordered written submissions regarding deferral of the application.

The applicant supported addressing deferral but requested oral submissions.

The Tribunal cancelled the oral hearing, determining that a decision on deferral would not finally dispose of the application and could be efficiently addressed through written submissions.

Hastings v. ArcelorMittal Dofasco Inc., 2013 HRTO 337

Paul Meier

115 cases2006–2026

Douglas Sanderson

In Private Practice12 cases1997–2013

Motion for recusal and to reopen a withdrawn application dismissed for lack of evidence.

The applicant brought a human rights application alleging discrimination based on disability.

Following an unsuccessful mediation session, the applicant requested that the adjudicator recuse himself due to alleged bias arising from prior interim decisions and conduct during mediation.

The applicant also sought to reopen a previously withdrawn application, claiming he lacked capacity due to depression when he withdrew it.

Ihasz v. Ontario (Revenue), 2013 HRTO 333

Mark Stone

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 6, 2013

Reconsideration of dismissed human rights application denied as applicant failed to meet required criteria.

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

The original application alleged termination based on disability, but was dismissed because the applicant had signed a full and final release after accepting a severance package.

The applicant argued for reconsideration based on ongoing medical issues and dissatisfaction with the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board.

The Tribunal found that these reasons did not meet the criteria for reconsideration under Rule 26.5(d) and dismissed the request.

Michael Dieter v. Transcontinental Printing Inc./RBW Graphics, 2013 HRTO 125

David Levangie

4 cases2013–2016

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 30, 2013

Human rights application dismissed; termination found to be based on performance, not racial discrimination.

The applicant, a black man, alleged that his employment at a laundromat was terminated because of his race and colour.

He claimed the individual respondent explicitly stated he did not trust black people when firing him.

The respondents denied the allegations, asserting the applicant was dismissed due to poor performance, lack of urgency, and a poor attitude towards direction.

The Tribunal assessed the credibility of the witnesses, noting inconsistencies in the applicant's evidence and that of his partner who overheard part of the termination conversation.

The Tribunal preferred the individual respondent's evidence, finding the dismissal was based on performance and attitude, not race.

The application was dismissed.

Thompson v. 1704275 Ontario Inc., 2013 HRTO 139

Jacinthe Boudreau

4 cases2012–2021

Helen Nowak

Practising Law - Employed8 cases2012–2016

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 28, 2013

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

The applicant alleged discrimination in employment based on place of origin, disability, family status, age, and reprisal against the employer and the union.

The Tribunal also found no evidence of reprisal regarding delays in processing the claimant's pension, which were attributed to clerical errors.

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

Cann v. Slovenian Linden Foundation, 2013 HRTO 143

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 23, 2013

Request for reconsideration of decision upholding lifetime ban from respondent's facilities dismissed.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his human rights application alleging he was banned from the respondent's facilities due to his race and creed.

The applicant argued the lifetime ban was disproportionate and took issue with the Tribunal's findings of fact and failure to record the original hearing.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding no conflict with established jurisprudence and noting that reconsideration is not an appeal or an opportunity to repair deficiencies in a case.

Gavin Francisco v. The Carlu Corporation, 2013 HRTO 123

Lawrence Phillips

In Private Practice1 case2013–2013

Jamie McGinnis

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 16, 2013

Tribunal denies respondents' untimely request to change hearing venue and orders immediate compliance with disclosure obligations.

The respondents requested a change of venue for the hearing from Thunder Bay to Fort Frances, citing difficulties in securing witnesses willing to travel.

The applicant opposed the request and sought an order regarding the respondents' failure to comply with pre-hearing disclosure obligations.

The Tribunal denied the change of venue, finding the request untimely and lacking sufficient Code-related reasons.

The Tribunal also directed the respondents to immediately file their required witness statements and materials, warning of potential evidentiary sanctions for non-compliance.

Speziale v. Royal Canadian Legion Branch #29, 2013 HRTO 86

Bram Lecker

In Private Practice5 cases2003–2015

Alix Herber

7 cases2010–2016

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 11, 2013

Human rights application dismissed under section 34(11) due to concurrent civil action seeking identical remedies.

The Tribunal found that the civil action arose from the same facts and sought remedies for the same alleged Code violations.

The Tribunal held that section 34(11) acts as a mandatory bar to the application, even though the individual respondents were not named in the civil action.

The application was dismissed.

Karl Grant v. Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Robyn Campol and Eve Buss, 2013 HRTO 59

Jamie McGinnis

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 10, 2013

Applicant permitted to amend human rights application to add reprisal allegations; respondents' representative ordered to prove standing.

The applicant filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings to amend her human rights application to add allegations of reprisals committed by the respondents after the application was filed.

The respondents' representative, who appeared to be an unlicensed third-party advocate, filed a separate request.

The Tribunal granted the applicant's request to amend, finding no prejudice to the respondents given the early stage of the proceeding.

Wozniczka v. The Polish Mutual Benefit Society, 2013 HRTO 51

Cédric Lamarche

5 cases2011–2021

Andrea Sanche

2 cases2012–2013

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 8, 2013

Human rights application not barred by concurrent wrongful dismissal civil action that does not allege Code breaches.

The Tribunal found that the civil claim was a wrongful dismissal action seeking common law damages and did not allege any Code breaches or seek human rights remedies.

As the proceedings were not duplicative, the Tribunal retained jurisdiction and dismissed the respondent's request.

Sonia Coombs-Carpio v. Toronto Catholic School Board Employees’ Credit Union Ltd., 2013 HRTO 26

Stephen Ellis

In Private Practice11 cases2010–2024

Brent Foreman

11 cases1985–2017

Douglas Sanderson

Tribunal ordered a preliminary hearing to determine if the respondent is a federally regulated telecommunications undertaking.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability.

The respondent requested dismissal on the preliminary basis that it is a federally regulated telecommunications undertaking outside provincial jurisdiction.

Finding that the jurisdictional facts were in dispute, the Tribunal ordered an in-person preliminary hearing to receive viva voce evidence and argument on the constitutional issue.

Qbue v. Cancable Inc. c.o.b. as Dependable HomeTech, 2013 HRTO 30

Douglas Sanderson

Respondent deemed to have waived participation and accepted allegations after failing to file a Response.

The applicant filed an Application alleging discrimination in employment.

The respondent failed to file a Response despite receiving notice and a subsequent direction from the Tribunal.

Perez-Moreno v. Kulczycki, 2013 HRTO 29

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application against Small Claims Court judge dismissed for lack of jurisdiction due to judicial immunity.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination by a Small Claims Court judge who dismissed his small claims action.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss on the basis that it lacked jurisdiction.

Applying the doctrine of judicial immunity, the Tribunal found it plain and obvious that it had no jurisdiction to hear an application based on the execution of adjudicative duties.

The application was dismissed.

Juchang Tao v. Small Claims Court of Toronto, 2013 HRTO 25

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 4, 2013

Request to reactivate deferred human rights application granted, pending submissions on effect of grievance settlement.

The applicant requested to reactivate her human rights application, which had been deferred pending the outcome of a union grievance.

The grievance was settled, but the applicant claimed the human rights issues were not addressed.

Samsam Abdulle v. National Car Rental and Alamo Rent-a-Car, 2013 HRTO 15

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 3, 2013

Respondent who failed to file a Response deemed to have waived right to participate.

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

One of the respondents failed to file a Response despite receiving notice and a subsequent Tribunal direction.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision deeming the non-responding party to have waived all rights to notice or participation in the proceedings.

Jesse Lorbetskie v. CCW Group of Companies Inc., Diane Benton and Derek Godbout, 2013 HRTO 6

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 2, 2013

Respondents granted 14 days to file a response to human rights application after missing initial deadline.

The applicant filed a human rights application against the respondents.

The respondents failed to file a response by the deadline set in the Notice of Application.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision warning the respondents of the consequences of failing to participate under Rule 5.5 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The respondents were granted 14 days to file a response along with an explanation for the delay, failing which the Tribunal may proceed without further notice.

Curtis v. Bloke & Forth, 2013 HRTO 7

Jo-Anne Boulding

1 case2012–2012

Douglas Sanderson