Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 31, 2012

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to attend summary hearing.

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

A summary hearing was scheduled, but the applicant failed to attend.

After waiting the customary 30 minutes and confirming that notice was properly sent, the Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

David Smith v. Ability Health Care Supplies Inc., 2012 HRTO 1486

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 24, 2012

Human rights application dismissed; employer provided credible non-discriminatory reasons for terminating pharmacist's employment.

The applicant, a pharmacist of Vietnamese descent, alleged discrimination in employment based on ancestry, place of origin, ethnic origin, and sex after his employment was terminated and a full-time position was given to a female pharmacist of Filipino descent.

The Tribunal found that while the applicant established a prima facie case of discrimination, the respondents provided a credible, non-discriminatory explanation for their decision.

The respondents demonstrated that the applicant had customer service issues, alienated co-workers, and engaged in unusual practices, whereas the selected candidate was a good team player with strong customer service skills.

The application was dismissed.

Tai Q. Tran v. Welcome Pharmacy (Queen) Ltd., 2012 HRTO 1445

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 18, 2012

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned following the applicant's death.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in housing and membership in a vocational association.

Shortly before the hearing, the applicant's daughter advised that the applicant's health prevented him from pursuing the application.

The Tribunal directed the applicant to file a Request to Withdraw.

The applicant subsequently passed away without filing the request.

The Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Charles Payne v. Malden Park Continuing Care Centre and Community Care Access Centre Erie St. Clair, 2012 HRTO 1414

Douglas Sanderson

In Private Practice18 cases1984–2021

Reconsideration request dismissed as the applicant provided no reasons for the request.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his human rights application as abandoned.

The original application was dismissed after the applicant failed to file submissions explaining why his allegations of racial harassment were timely under the Human Rights Code.

The applicant filed a request for reconsideration but provided no reasons for the request.

The Tribunal found no compelling or extraordinary circumstances to reconsider the decision and dismissed the request.

Wayne Widdis v. Great West Life Realty Inc., 2012 HRTO 1385

Stephen Bernofsky

Douglas Sanderson

Practising Law - Employed113 cases1994–2025

Individual respondent removed as a party to the application on consent.

The parties made a joint request to remove the individual respondent as a party to the human rights application.

The Tribunal granted the request and amended the style of cause accordingly.

Richards v. Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation #1251, 2012 HRTO 1384

Human rights application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as respondents are federally regulated transportation enterprises.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal in employment.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss on the basis that the respondents appeared to be federally regulated.

The respondents submitted that their transportation and warehousing operations are fully integrated and extend beyond provincial borders, bringing them under federal jurisdiction pursuant to s. 92(10)(a) of the Constitution Act, 1867.

The applicant made no submissions on the issue.

The Tribunal found that the organizational respondents are federally regulated companies and dismissed the application for lack of jurisdiction.

Wave v. Canada Cartage Diversified GP Inc., 2012 HRTO 1362

Mark A. Stone

12 cases2000–2013

Caroline Cohen

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 9, 2012

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to attend scheduled summary hearing.

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

A summary hearing was scheduled by telephone, but the applicant failed to attend.

After waiting 30 minutes and confirming that notice was properly sent, the Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

MacLeod v. eHealth Ontario, 2012 HRTO 1341

Andrea Sanche

2 cases2012–2013

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 6, 2012

Human rights application deferred pending the outcome of a concurrent civil action for wrongful dismissal.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and harassment based on age and language proficiency, culminating in his layoff.

The respondent requested that the application be barred or deferred because the applicant had already commenced a civil action for wrongful dismissal that included allegations of age discrimination.

The Tribunal found that while the civil claim did not plead all the human rights allegations, the termination was central to both proceedings.

To avoid duplicate proceedings and inconsistent decisions, the Tribunal deferred the application pending the outcome of the civil action.

Mikhael Grishin v. Frommelt Industries of Canada Inc., 2012 HRTO 1340

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 4, 2012

Applicant directed to advise if oral submissions are sought on respondent's request for early dismissal.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and harassment in employment, culminating in termination.

The respondents requested early dismissal under section 45.1 of the Human Rights Code, arguing the matter was appropriately dealt with through a grievance procedure that resulted in Minutes of Settlement and a full and final release.

The applicant claimed the settlement was signed under duress.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision directing the applicant to advise within 14 days whether he wishes to make oral submissions on the dismissal request, failing which the matter will be decided on the written record.

Bello v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2012 HRTO 1320

Douglas Sanderson

Not Practising Law - Employed33 cases2005–2014

Preliminary hearing scheduled to determine if human rights application should be dismissed for delay.

The applicant filed a human rights application more than one year after her dismissal from employment.

The Tribunal previously found it was not plain and obvious that the delay was not incurred in good faith, but noted the decision was not final.

The respondents subsequently filed a Response arguing the application should be dismissed for delay due to an inadequate explanation and prejudice.

The Tribunal ordered a half-day preliminary hearing to determine the issue of delay.

Maraj v. Erin Mills Mitsubishi, 2012 HRTO 1315

Michelle Dobranowski

Douglas Sanderson

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

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability regarding the accommodation of a workplace injury.

In her Reply, the applicant raised new allegations regarding a Community Service position and fluctuating shifts.

The respondent filed a Request for Order During Proceeding seeking to amend its Response to address these new allegations, treating them as an expansion of the Application.

The Tribunal granted the request, noting the hearing was months away, there was no prejudice to the applicant, and dealing with all accommodation issues in one proceeding would avoid multiplicity.

Browne v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2012 HRTO 1314

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction over federal entities and failure to plead specific acts.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment, housing, and services against the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the federal Department of Justice.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss because the respondents appeared to be federally regulated and the application lacked specific allegations of discrimination.

After reviewing the applicant's submissions, the Tribunal dismissed the application, finding it plain and obvious that the respondents were federally regulated and outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction, and that the applicant failed to describe any specific acts of discrimination.

Ajay Hayer v. The Canadian Human Rights Commission and the Department of Justice (Canada), 2012 HRTO 1310

Ian Solomon

18 cases2007–2017

Douglas Sanderson

Tribunal directs applicant to advise if he wishes to make oral submissions on respondent's dismissal request.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment based on record of offences, claiming he was wrongly terminated for failing to complete a rehabilitation program.

The respondent requested early dismissal under section 45.1 of the Human Rights Code, arguing the matter was appropriately dealt with through two last chance agreements containing full and final releases.

Stephen Miller v. City of Toronto, 2012 HRTO 1303

Douglas Sanderson

Practising Law - Employed40 cases2011–2023

Individual respondent deemed to have waived participation rights after failing to file a Response.

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

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

The Tribunal ordered that the non-responding individual respondent is deemed to have waived all rights to notice or participation in the proceedings.

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

Thomas v. IATSE Local 822, 2012 HRTO 1299

Heather McIvor

Douglas Sanderson

Request to add individual respondents and for document disclosure denied in human rights reprisal complaint.

The applicant in a human rights reprisal complaint filed a Request for Order seeking to add two individuals as respondents and requesting disclosure of certain documents.

The Tribunal denied the request to add the respondents, finding no allegations that could support a finding they violated the Code and noting that adding them would unnecessarily delay and complicate the proceedings.

The Tribunal also denied the disclosure request, finding the requested credentials were not arguably relevant and the requested correspondence was either not shown to exist or subject to solicitor-client privilege.

Wilson v. Ontario (Attorney-General), 2012 HRTO 1294

Douglas Sanderson

Request to extend disclosure deadline denied as applicant failed to explain how disability prevented compliance.

The applicant requested an extension of the disclosure deadline for an upcoming preliminary hearing from 14 days to 12 days prior to the hearing, citing her communication-based disability and another applicant's recent consultation with legal counsel.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding the other applicant's situation irrelevant and noting that the applicant failed to explain how her disability prevented her from meeting the established timeline.

Ryder v. Ryerson University Students’ Union, 2012 HRTO 1286

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Tribunal correspondence.

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

The Tribunal had previously deferred the application pending the conclusion of ongoing grievance proceedings.

After the applicant's representative closed his practice, the Tribunal made multiple written requests directly to the applicant for a status update on the grievance proceedings.

The applicant failed to respond to the Tribunal's correspondence.

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

McKenzie v. Villa Forum, 2012 HRTO 1284

Osborne Barnwell

24 cases2000–2025

Jennifer Richards

82 cases2007–2019

Douglas Sanderson

Licence Surrendered - Retired22 cases1985–2016

Individual respondent removed from human rights application where corporate respondent accepted vicarious liability.

The respondents requested an order to remove the individual respondent, Marsha Smith, from the human rights application.

The organizational respondent, the Ministry of Government Services, accepted vicarious liability for the alleged discriminatory conduct, which arose in the context of employment.

Applying the factors from Persaud, the Tribunal found no compelling reason to continue the proceeding against the individual respondent, as the Ministry could remedy any Code infringement and the applicant would not be prejudiced.

The request was granted and the application was dismissed against the individual respondent.

Barnwell v. Ontario (Government Services), 2012 HRTO 1279

Peter Thorup

Douglas Sanderson

Request to proceed granted; preliminary hearing scheduled to consider section 45.1 dismissal following grievance arbitration.

The applicant filed a Request to proceed with his human rights application after it was deferred pending the conclusion of a grievance arbitration.

The respondents opposed reactivation, arguing the application should be dismissed under section 45.1 of the Human Rights Code because the labour arbitration appropriately dealt with its substance.

The Tribunal granted the request to proceed and scheduled a preliminary hearing by conference call to receive submissions on whether the application should be dismissed under section 45.1.

Jonathan Guider v. Craigwood Youth Services, 2012 HRTO 1277

Douglas Sanderson

Employment and Labour Law

Respondent given 10 days to file a Response to human rights application after missing deadline.

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

The respondent failed to file a Response by the required deadline.

The Tribunal issued an Interim Decision warning the respondent of the consequences of failing to participate under Rule 5.5 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure, and granted the respondent 10 days to file a Response along with an explanation for the delay.

Marcia Marsha Daley v. Fiorio Cumberland, Fiorio Inc., 2012 HRTO 1275

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

Other Tribunals

Landlord and Tenant

Bankruptcy and Insolvency Law

Workplace Safety and Insurance Law

Indigenous Legal Issues

Family and Matrimonial Law

Health Law

Douglas Sanderson

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

OPEHT HRTO

667

cases · 15 yrs · HRTO, OPEHT

Trial

Motion

Costs

Appeal

Sentencing

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

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 31, 2012

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to attend summary hearing.

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

A summary hearing was scheduled, but the applicant failed to attend.

After waiting the customary 30 minutes and confirming that notice was properly sent, the Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

David Smith v. Ability Health Care Supplies Inc., 2012 HRTO 1486

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 24, 2012

Human rights application dismissed; employer provided credible non-discriminatory reasons for terminating pharmacist's employment.

The Tribunal found that while the applicant established a prima facie case of discrimination, the respondents provided a credible, non-discriminatory explanation for their decision.

The application was dismissed.

Tai Q. Tran v. Welcome Pharmacy (Queen) Ltd., 2012 HRTO 1445

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 18, 2012

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned following the applicant's death.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in housing and membership in a vocational association.

Shortly before the hearing, the applicant's daughter advised that the applicant's health prevented him from pursuing the application.

The Tribunal directed the applicant to file a Request to Withdraw.

The applicant subsequently passed away without filing the request.

The Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Charles Payne v. Malden Park Continuing Care Centre and Community Care Access Centre Erie St. Clair, 2012 HRTO 1414

Douglas Sanderson

In Private Practice18 cases1984–2021

Reconsideration request dismissed as the applicant provided no reasons for the request.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his human rights application as abandoned.

The original application was dismissed after the applicant failed to file submissions explaining why his allegations of racial harassment were timely under the Human Rights Code.

The applicant filed a request for reconsideration but provided no reasons for the request.

The Tribunal found no compelling or extraordinary circumstances to reconsider the decision and dismissed the request.

Wayne Widdis v. Great West Life Realty Inc., 2012 HRTO 1385

Stephen Bernofsky

Douglas Sanderson

Individual respondent removed as a party to the application on consent.

The parties made a joint request to remove the individual respondent as a party to the human rights application.

The Tribunal granted the request and amended the style of cause accordingly.

Richards v. Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation #1251, 2012 HRTO 1384

Bruce Best

45 cases2008–2015

Allyson Fischer

6 cases2010–2015

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 10, 2012

Human rights application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as respondents are federally regulated transportation enterprises.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal in employment.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss on the basis that the respondents appeared to be federally regulated.

The applicant made no submissions on the issue.

The Tribunal found that the organizational respondents are federally regulated companies and dismissed the application for lack of jurisdiction.

Wave v. Canada Cartage Diversified GP Inc., 2012 HRTO 1362

Mark A. Stone

12 cases2000–2013

Caroline Cohen

Practising Law - Employed113 cases1994–2025

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 9, 2012

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to attend scheduled summary hearing.

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

A summary hearing was scheduled by telephone, but the applicant failed to attend.

After waiting 30 minutes and confirming that notice was properly sent, the Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

MacLeod v. eHealth Ontario, 2012 HRTO 1341

Andrea Sanche

2 cases2012–2013

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 6, 2012

Human rights application deferred pending the outcome of a concurrent civil action for wrongful dismissal.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and harassment based on age and language proficiency, culminating in his layoff.

The respondent requested that the application be barred or deferred because the applicant had already commenced a civil action for wrongful dismissal that included allegations of age discrimination.

The Tribunal found that while the civil claim did not plead all the human rights allegations, the termination was central to both proceedings.

To avoid duplicate proceedings and inconsistent decisions, the Tribunal deferred the application pending the outcome of the civil action.

Mikhael Grishin v. Frommelt Industries of Canada Inc., 2012 HRTO 1340

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 4, 2012

Applicant directed to advise if oral submissions are sought on respondent's request for early dismissal.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and harassment in employment, culminating in termination.

The applicant claimed the settlement was signed under duress.

Bello v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2012 HRTO 1320

Douglas Sanderson

Not Practising Law - Employed33 cases2005–2014

Preliminary hearing scheduled to determine if human rights application should be dismissed for delay.

The applicant filed a human rights application more than one year after her dismissal from employment.

The Tribunal previously found it was not plain and obvious that the delay was not incurred in good faith, but noted the decision was not final.

The respondents subsequently filed a Response arguing the application should be dismissed for delay due to an inadequate explanation and prejudice.

The Tribunal ordered a half-day preliminary hearing to determine the issue of delay.

Maraj v. Erin Mills Mitsubishi, 2012 HRTO 1315

Michelle Dobranowski

Douglas Sanderson

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

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability regarding the accommodation of a workplace injury.

In her Reply, the applicant raised new allegations regarding a Community Service position and fluctuating shifts.

The respondent filed a Request for Order During Proceeding seeking to amend its Response to address these new allegations, treating them as an expansion of the Application.

The Tribunal granted the request, noting the hearing was months away, there was no prejudice to the applicant, and dealing with all accommodation issues in one proceeding would avoid multiplicity.

Browne v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2012 HRTO 1314

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction over federal entities and failure to plead specific acts.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment, housing, and services against the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the federal Department of Justice.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss because the respondents appeared to be federally regulated and the application lacked specific allegations of discrimination.

Ajay Hayer v. The Canadian Human Rights Commission and the Department of Justice (Canada), 2012 HRTO 1310

Ian Solomon

18 cases2007–2017

Douglas Sanderson

Tribunal directs applicant to advise if he wishes to make oral submissions on respondent's dismissal request.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment based on record of offences, claiming he was wrongly terminated for failing to complete a rehabilitation program.

Stephen Miller v. City of Toronto, 2012 HRTO 1303

Douglas Sanderson

Practising Law - Employed40 cases2011–2023

Individual respondent deemed to have waived participation rights after failing to file a Response.

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

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

The Tribunal ordered that the non-responding individual respondent is deemed to have waived all rights to notice or participation in the proceedings.

Thomas v. IATSE Local 822, 2012 HRTO 1299

Heather McIvor

Douglas Sanderson

Request to add individual respondents and for document disclosure denied in human rights reprisal complaint.

The applicant in a human rights reprisal complaint filed a Request for Order seeking to add two individuals as respondents and requesting disclosure of certain documents.

Wilson v. Ontario (Attorney-General), 2012 HRTO 1294

Douglas Sanderson

Request to extend disclosure deadline denied as applicant failed to explain how disability prevented compliance.

Ryder v. Ryerson University Students’ Union, 2012 HRTO 1286

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Tribunal correspondence.

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

The Tribunal had previously deferred the application pending the conclusion of ongoing grievance proceedings.

After the applicant's representative closed his practice, the Tribunal made multiple written requests directly to the applicant for a status update on the grievance proceedings.

The applicant failed to respond to the Tribunal's correspondence.

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

McKenzie v. Villa Forum, 2012 HRTO 1284

Osborne Barnwell

24 cases2000–2025

Jennifer Richards

82 cases2007–2019

Douglas Sanderson

Licence Surrendered - Retired22 cases1985–2016

Individual respondent removed from human rights application where corporate respondent accepted vicarious liability.

The respondents requested an order to remove the individual respondent, Marsha Smith, from the human rights application.

The organizational respondent, the Ministry of Government Services, accepted vicarious liability for the alleged discriminatory conduct, which arose in the context of employment.

The request was granted and the application was dismissed against the individual respondent.

Barnwell v. Ontario (Government Services), 2012 HRTO 1279

Peter Thorup

Douglas Sanderson

Request to proceed granted; preliminary hearing scheduled to consider section 45.1 dismissal following grievance arbitration.

The applicant filed a Request to proceed with his human rights application after it was deferred pending the conclusion of a grievance arbitration.

The respondents opposed reactivation, arguing the application should be dismissed under section 45.1 of the Human Rights Code because the labour arbitration appropriately dealt with its substance.

The Tribunal granted the request to proceed and scheduled a preliminary hearing by conference call to receive submissions on whether the application should be dismissed under section 45.1.

Jonathan Guider v. Craigwood Youth Services, 2012 HRTO 1277

Douglas Sanderson