Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioSep 21, 2011

Human rights application against Legal Aid Ontario dismissed at summary hearing for lacking reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of race, place of origin, ethnic origin, disability, and reprisal against Legal Aid Ontario and two of its employees.

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

The applicant alleged that the respondents improperly denied her a second legal aid certificate to appeal her criminal conviction, 'doctored' her legal aid file, and conspired with her former lawyer and the Crown.

The Tribunal found that the applicant provided only bald allegations without any evidence linking the respondents' actions to a prohibited ground of discrimination.

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

Mathurin v. Legal Aid Ontario, 2011 HRTO 1740

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioSep 13, 2011

Applicant permitted to amend Reply to address allegedly untrue statements in the Response.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging employment discrimination.

After the respondents filed a Response and requested a summary hearing, the applicant sought an order to amend his Reply to address allegedly untrue statements in the Response, having recently obtained legal advice.

The Tribunal granted the request, noting it was made promptly, the proposed amendments were within the scope of reply pleadings, and the respondents identified no prejudice.

Ruremesha v. Travelers Guarantee Company of Canada, 2011 HRTO 1683

Joseph Jordana

1 case2011–2011

Douglas Sanderson

Not Practising Law7 cases2006–2016

Adjournment of conference call hearing granted due to applicant's unreschedulable medical procedure.

The applicant requested an adjournment of a scheduled conference call hearing because he had to undergo an unreschedulable medical procedure on the same day.

The respondents did not oppose the request.

The Tribunal found that the circumstances justified a brief adjournment and directed the parties to provide available dates for rescheduling.

Stanely Czerniak v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2011 HRTO 1674

Paul D. Koven

Douglas Sanderson

Adjournment of summary hearing granted to allow applicant to produce medical documents relevant to release validity.

The applicant requested an adjournment of a scheduled summary hearing shortly after retaining counsel, in order to obtain and produce medical documents relevant to the validity of a release he had executed in favour of the respondent.

The respondent did not oppose the request.

The Tribunal found that extraordinary circumstances justified the brief adjournment, as proceeding without potentially relevant information regarding the release would be inappropriate.

Hamza Ali v. Alpha Polybag Corp., 2011 HRTO 1672

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioSep 1, 2011

Respondents ordered to produce un-redacted settlement agreement to determine early dismissal request.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination and reprisal.

The respondents sought early dismissal based on a Memorandum of Settlement and timeliness, providing a heavily redacted copy of the settlement due to a confidentiality clause.

The Tribunal ordered the respondents to immediately deliver an un-redacted copy of the Memorandum and the related grievances, as they are central to determining the effect of the settlement.

Stanley Czerniak v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services and Jay Hope, 2011 HRTO 1637

Douglas Sanderson

Tribunal denies applicant's request to have witnesses testify by telephone and limits on testimony duration.

In a pre-hearing interim decision, the applicant requested that his witnesses be permitted to testify by telephone conference and that his medical witness be limited to 30 minutes of testimony.

The Tribunal denied the request, noting that witnesses are generally expected to attend in person and that the applicant provided no reasons to justify telephone testimony.

The Tribunal also found that 30 minutes would be insufficient for the medical witness's testimony and cross-examination, ordering all witnesses to attend in person for as long as required.

Michael LeBlanc v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2011 HRTO 1634

Owen M. Rees

14 cases2007–2017

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application against Law Society dismissed at summary hearing for lacking reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination by the Law Society of Upper Canada and a Complaints Resolution Commissioner in their handling and dismissal of her complaint against her former criminal defence lawyer.

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

Finding that the applicant provided only bare allegations and no evidence linking the respondents' actions to a prohibited ground of discrimination, the Tribunal dismissed the application.

Mathurin v. Law Society of Upper Canada, 2011 HRTO 1271

Steve Lavender

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 30, 2011

Request for further document disclosure denied as applicant failed to establish arguable relevance.

The applicant, a former dispatcher, filed a Request for Order During Proceeding seeking further disclosure from the respondent, including his full medical and employment files, specific emails, and break schedules.

The respondent maintained it had already produced all arguably relevant documents, including the occupational health file and emails, and argued the remaining requested documents were not relevant to the reasons for the applicant's dismissal.

The Tribunal refused the request, finding the applicant had not established the arguable relevance of the employment file or break schedules, and accepted the respondent's assertion that the other documents had already been produced.

Le Blanc v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2011 HRTO 1625

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 19, 2011

Human rights application dismissed due to applicant's failure to attend the scheduled hearing.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on various grounds.

A hearing was scheduled, and the applicant had previously confirmed her attendance.

However, the applicant failed to appear at the hearing.

After waiting the customary time and confirming notice was given, the Tribunal dismissed the application due to the applicant's non-attendance.

Brigitte Lacourciere v. Steven Starkman, 2011 HRTO 1553

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 18, 2011

Reconsideration of human rights application dismissed as applicant failed to present new determinative evidence.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a previous Tribunal decision that dismissed her human rights application due to a delay in filing.

She argued that new facts, including the timeline of a Ministry of Labour investigation and advice from legal services, justified the delay.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to present any new determinative facts or evidence that could not have been reasonably obtained earlier.

The request for reconsideration was denied.

Grossi v. York Lanes Health Centre, 2011 HRTO 1549

Steve Lavender

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 17, 2011

Applicant ordered to produce medical and mitigation documents relevant to alleged disabilities and damages.

The respondent requested an order compelling the applicant to comply with his disclosure obligations under the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure, specifically seeking medical records related to the applicant's alleged disabilities and documents regarding his mitigation efforts.

The Tribunal ordered the applicant to produce the requested medical and mitigation documents, finding them arguably relevant to the issues of accommodation and damages, but declined to order the production of an OHIP summary.

LeBlanc v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2011 HRTO 1538

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 22, 2011

Respondent's request for documentary disclosure denied as premature following the rescheduling of hearing dates.

The respondent filed a Request for Order During Proceeding seeking new hearing dates and documentary disclosure, including medical notes.

The Tribunal granted the request to reschedule the hearing, which established new disclosure deadlines.

Consequently, the Tribunal found the respondent's request for documentary disclosure to be premature and denied it, noting the respondent could renew the request if the applicant failed to disclose arguably relevant documents by the new deadline.

Michael LeBlanc v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2011 HRTO 1382

Robert Dowhan

6 cases2010–2016

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 5, 2011

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

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

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

After waiting the customary period and confirming that notice of the hearing was properly sent, the Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Veetland Knight v. Poly Nova Technologies Inc., 2011 HRTO 1283

Douglas Sanderson

Application dismissed against seven personal respondents for failing to allege specific acts of discrimination.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability against two corporate respondents and fifteen personal respondents.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss regarding ten of the personal respondents because the application failed to identify specific acts of discrimination by them.

After reviewing the applicant's written submissions, the Tribunal dismissed the application against seven personal respondents but allowed it to proceed against three who were alleged to have refused modified work or questioned medical reports.

Dopelhamer v. Sobeys, 2011 HRTO 1139

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as the respondent is a federally regulated undertaking.

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

The respondent filed a Request for Order During Proceedings seeking to dismiss the application, arguing that it is a federally regulated inter-provincial freight carrier.

The applicant did not respond to the request.

The Tribunal found that the respondent is federally regulated and dismissed the application for lack of jurisdiction.

Robert Haskin v. L.M.B. Transport Inc., 2011 HRTO 1084

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application against family arbitrator dismissed due to judicial immunity.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination based on sex and marital status by an arbitrator who ordered the partition and sale of his matrimonial home.

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

The Tribunal found that family arbitrators appointed under the Arbitration Act are protected by the doctrine of judicial immunity, as their ability to decide matters impartially would be compromised if exposed to Human Rights Code applications.

The application was dismissed.

Stefan Martek v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Attorney General, 2011 HRTO 1077

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 2, 2011

Human rights application dismissed for delay; waiting for concurrent proceedings does not justify late filing.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination based on an erroneous independent medical evaluation report provided by the respondent in 2006.

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

The applicant argued the delay was justified because he was waiting for concurrent proceedings before the College of Physicians and Surgeons and the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board to conclude.

The Tribunal found that waiting for other legal proceedings does not constitute a valid explanation for delay and dismissed the application as the delay was not incurred in good faith.

Silas v. Fielden, 2011 HRTO 1057

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 1, 2011

Request to postpone summary hearing denied for lack of exceptional circumstances.

The applicant requested a two-week postponement of a scheduled Summary Hearing, citing a need for more time to prepare and the unavailability of her assistants.

The Tribunal denied the request, noting that the applicant had been aware of the hearing for months, had already received a lengthy postponement, and failed to establish exceptional circumstances as required by the Tribunal's Practice Direction.

Marie Mathurin v. Law Society of Upper Canada and Clare Lewis, 2011 HRTO 1045

Douglas Sanderson

Respondent granted 10 days to file a response after failing to meet the initial deadline.

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

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

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.

The Tribunal granted the respondent 10 days to file a response along with an explanation for the delay, failing which the Tribunal may proceed without further notice.

Stephen Shepherd v. Maximum Detailing, 2011 HRTO 1044

Douglas Sanderson

Employment and Labour Law

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

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

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (NOID) because the application appeared to be outside its jurisdiction.

The applicant was directed to respond but failed to do so within the specified time.

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

Kapil Sharma v. Royal Bank of Canada, 2011 HRTO 1039

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

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

Tracy A. Pratt

16 cases2004–2017

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioSep 21, 2011

Human rights application against Legal Aid Ontario dismissed at summary hearing for lacking reasonable prospect of success.

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

The Tribunal found that the applicant provided only bald allegations without any evidence linking the respondents' actions to a prohibited ground of discrimination.

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

Mathurin v. Legal Aid Ontario, 2011 HRTO 1740

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioSep 13, 2011

Applicant permitted to amend Reply to address allegedly untrue statements in the Response.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging employment discrimination.

The Tribunal granted the request, noting it was made promptly, the proposed amendments were within the scope of reply pleadings, and the respondents identified no prejudice.

Ruremesha v. Travelers Guarantee Company of Canada, 2011 HRTO 1683

Joseph Jordana

1 case2011–2011

Douglas Sanderson

Not Practising Law7 cases2006–2016

Adjournment of conference call hearing granted due to applicant's unreschedulable medical procedure.

The applicant requested an adjournment of a scheduled conference call hearing because he had to undergo an unreschedulable medical procedure on the same day.

The respondents did not oppose the request.

The Tribunal found that the circumstances justified a brief adjournment and directed the parties to provide available dates for rescheduling.

Stanely Czerniak v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2011 HRTO 1674

Paul D. Koven

Douglas Sanderson

Adjournment of summary hearing granted to allow applicant to produce medical documents relevant to release validity.

The respondent did not oppose the request.

The Tribunal found that extraordinary circumstances justified the brief adjournment, as proceeding without potentially relevant information regarding the release would be inappropriate.

Hamza Ali v. Alpha Polybag Corp., 2011 HRTO 1672

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioSep 1, 2011

Respondents ordered to produce un-redacted settlement agreement to determine early dismissal request.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination and reprisal.

The respondents sought early dismissal based on a Memorandum of Settlement and timeliness, providing a heavily redacted copy of the settlement due to a confidentiality clause.

The Tribunal ordered the respondents to immediately deliver an un-redacted copy of the Memorandum and the related grievances, as they are central to determining the effect of the settlement.

Stanley Czerniak v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services and Jay Hope, 2011 HRTO 1637

Douglas Sanderson

Tribunal denies applicant's request to have witnesses testify by telephone and limits on testimony duration.

In a pre-hearing interim decision, the applicant requested that his witnesses be permitted to testify by telephone conference and that his medical witness be limited to 30 minutes of testimony.

The Tribunal denied the request, noting that witnesses are generally expected to attend in person and that the applicant provided no reasons to justify telephone testimony.

The Tribunal also found that 30 minutes would be insufficient for the medical witness's testimony and cross-examination, ordering all witnesses to attend in person for as long as required.

Michael LeBlanc v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2011 HRTO 1634

Owen M. Rees

14 cases2007–2017

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application against Law Society dismissed at summary hearing for lacking reasonable prospect of success.

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

Finding that the applicant provided only bare allegations and no evidence linking the respondents' actions to a prohibited ground of discrimination, the Tribunal dismissed the application.

Mathurin v. Law Society of Upper Canada, 2011 HRTO 1271

Steve Lavender

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 30, 2011

Request for further document disclosure denied as applicant failed to establish arguable relevance.

Le Blanc v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2011 HRTO 1625

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 19, 2011

Human rights application dismissed due to applicant's failure to attend the scheduled hearing.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on various grounds.

A hearing was scheduled, and the applicant had previously confirmed her attendance.

However, the applicant failed to appear at the hearing.

After waiting the customary time and confirming notice was given, the Tribunal dismissed the application due to the applicant's non-attendance.

Brigitte Lacourciere v. Steven Starkman, 2011 HRTO 1553

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 18, 2011

Reconsideration of human rights application dismissed as applicant failed to present new determinative evidence.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a previous Tribunal decision that dismissed her human rights application due to a delay in filing.

She argued that new facts, including the timeline of a Ministry of Labour investigation and advice from legal services, justified the delay.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to present any new determinative facts or evidence that could not have been reasonably obtained earlier.

The request for reconsideration was denied.

Grossi v. York Lanes Health Centre, 2011 HRTO 1549

Steve Lavender

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 17, 2011

Applicant ordered to produce medical and mitigation documents relevant to alleged disabilities and damages.

LeBlanc v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2011 HRTO 1538

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 22, 2011

Respondent's request for documentary disclosure denied as premature following the rescheduling of hearing dates.

The respondent filed a Request for Order During Proceeding seeking new hearing dates and documentary disclosure, including medical notes.

The Tribunal granted the request to reschedule the hearing, which established new disclosure deadlines.

Michael LeBlanc v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2011 HRTO 1382

Robert Dowhan

6 cases2010–2016

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 5, 2011

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

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

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

After waiting the customary period and confirming that notice of the hearing was properly sent, the Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.

Veetland Knight v. Poly Nova Technologies Inc., 2011 HRTO 1283

Douglas Sanderson

Application dismissed against seven personal respondents for failing to allege specific acts of discrimination.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability against two corporate respondents and fifteen personal respondents.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss regarding ten of the personal respondents because the application failed to identify specific acts of discrimination by them.

Dopelhamer v. Sobeys, 2011 HRTO 1139

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as the respondent is a federally regulated undertaking.

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

The respondent filed a Request for Order During Proceedings seeking to dismiss the application, arguing that it is a federally regulated inter-provincial freight carrier.

The applicant did not respond to the request.

The Tribunal found that the respondent is federally regulated and dismissed the application for lack of jurisdiction.

Robert Haskin v. L.M.B. Transport Inc., 2011 HRTO 1084

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application against family arbitrator dismissed due to judicial immunity.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination based on sex and marital status by an arbitrator who ordered the partition and sale of his matrimonial home.

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

The application was dismissed.

Stefan Martek v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Attorney General, 2011 HRTO 1077

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 2, 2011

Human rights application dismissed for delay; waiting for concurrent proceedings does not justify late filing.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination based on an erroneous independent medical evaluation report provided by the respondent in 2006.

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

The Tribunal found that waiting for other legal proceedings does not constitute a valid explanation for delay and dismissed the application as the delay was not incurred in good faith.

Silas v. Fielden, 2011 HRTO 1057

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 1, 2011

Request to postpone summary hearing denied for lack of exceptional circumstances.

The applicant requested a two-week postponement of a scheduled Summary Hearing, citing a need for more time to prepare and the unavailability of her assistants.

Marie Mathurin v. Law Society of Upper Canada and Clare Lewis, 2011 HRTO 1045

Douglas Sanderson

Respondent granted 10 days to file a response after failing to meet the initial deadline.

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

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

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.

The Tribunal granted the respondent 10 days to file a response along with an explanation for the delay, failing which the Tribunal may proceed without further notice.

Stephen Shepherd v. Maximum Detailing, 2011 HRTO 1044

Douglas Sanderson