Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 3, 2011

Application alleging breach of settlement dismissed as respondent fulfilled its obligation to provide an information sheet.

The applicant filed an application alleging that the respondent breached the minutes of settlement from a previous human rights application.

The settlement required the respondent to create a plain language information sheet outlining restrictions for youths applying for social assistance and to provide a copy to the applicant.

The applicant acknowledged receiving the document but objected to the substance of the respondent's policy.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the respondent fulfilled its obligations under the settlement and was not required to seek the applicant's approval regarding the policy's substance.

Basic v. Covenant House, 2011 HRTO 861

Matthew Fisher

3 cases2011–2013

Mark Geiger

In Private Practice12 cases1986–2016

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 21, 2011

Adjournment request denied due to lack of exceptional circumstances; parties directed to fulfill disclosure obligations.

The corporate respondent requested an adjournment of the hearing to obtain instructions from its insurer and gather documents.

The applicant opposed the request, noting the late stage of the proceedings and the significant costs of travelling from overseas.

The Tribunal denied the adjournment, finding no exceptional circumstances to justify the late request.

The Tribunal also directed both parties to comply with their pre-hearing disclosure obligations, including the provision of detailed witness statements.

Mead v. Loop Enterprises, 2011 HRTO 810

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 15, 2011

Human rights application dismissed as out of time; pursuing other remedies did not excuse delay.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, claiming she was terminated after attempting to return from a medical leave for cancer treatment.

The application was filed more than one year after the last alleged incident of discrimination.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss.

The applicant argued the delay was due to pursuing a Ministry of Labour complaint and ignorance of her rights under the Code.

The Tribunal found that pursuing other legal remedies and ignorance of rights without reasonable inquiry did not constitute a good faith explanation for the delay.

The application was dismissed as out of time.

Grossi v. York Lanes Health Centre, 2011 HRTO 732

Patricia G. Murray

35 cases1990–2017

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 12, 2011

Tribunal strikes untimely allegations and removes individual respondents from human rights application.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment based on disability, citing incidents from 2005 and his termination in 2009.

The respondents requested to strike the 2005 allegations for delay and to remove the individual respondents.

The applicant requested to add another individual respondent.

The Tribunal found that the 2005 incidents were not part of a series of incidents and the delay was not incurred in good faith, limiting the application to incidents within the one-year limitation period.

The Tribunal also removed the individual respondents and denied the request to add another, as the corporate respondent could adequately respond to and remedy the alleged conduct.

Whitwell v. U.S. Steel Canada, 2011 HRTO 670

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 7, 2011

Reconsideration request denied as applicant failed to establish criteria under Rule 26.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his application alleging his home was undervalued due to discrimination.

The applicant argued that the adjudicator improperly admitted testimony that was not disclosed prior to the hearing.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the testimony arose during the applicant's own cross-examination, no underlying documents existed, and the applicant failed to establish any criteria for reconsideration under Rule 26.

Owens v. Minnick & Company Appraisers, 2011 HRTO 671

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 4, 2011

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of related Employment Standards Act review proceeding.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of sex (pregnancy) after her employment was terminated.

She also filed a claim under the Employment Standards Act (ESA) for the same events, which resulted in an order to pay in her favour.

The respondent requested a review of the ESA decision by the Ontario Labour Relations Board and sought to defer the human rights application pending the outcome of that review.

The Tribunal granted the request, finding that deferral was appropriate to avoid concurrent proceedings and inconsistent decisions, given the similar issues and potential for overlapping remedies.

Ahmed v. Bains Foods Inc. c.o.b. as Tim Hortons, 2011 HRTO 641

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed for delay as it was filed outside the one-year limitation period.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of race and failure to accommodate following a workplace injury, nearly two years after her employment was terminated.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss because the application was filed outside the one-year statutory limitation period under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The applicant argued the delay was due to not receiving a WSIB letter, but the Tribunal found this explanation unreasonable as she filed the application before receiving the letter and had previously settled a grievance regarding the same issues.

The application was dismissed as the delay was not incurred in good faith.

Janet Brown v. Vigour Limited Partnership LWI Cheltenham and David Cutler, 2011 HRTO 636

Douglas Sanderson

Request to proceed granted after union grievance withdrawn.

The applicant filed a Request to proceed under Rule 14.3 after a grievance filed with his union was withdrawn.

Neither the respondent nor the union responded to the Request.

The Tribunal found the Request to proceed appropriate and granted it, directing the Registrar to process the Application in the normal course.

Frank Mazzei v. General Motors of Canada, 2011 HRTO 635

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 scheduled a mediation session, but the Notice of Mediation sent to the applicant was returned by Canada Post indicating she had moved.

The Tribunal was unable to contact the applicant by phone and sent correspondence warning that the application would be deemed abandoned if she did not respond within 10 days.

The applicant failed to respond.

The Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Sretana Novic v. Loyalty One Inc., 2011 HRTO 615

Douglas Sanderson

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

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment based on sexual solicitation or advances.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because the application lacked information regarding the alleged unwelcome sexual solicitation.

The applicant failed to respond to the Notice by the specified deadline.

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

Laurier Madore v. Sears Canada, 2011 HRTO 613

Jane Gooding

15 cases2009–2018

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMar 28, 2011

Tribunal allows respondents to amend Response and removes individual respondents, but declines to deem application abandoned.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on various grounds.

The respondents brought requests for orders during the proceeding to amend their Response, remove the individual respondents, and deem the application abandoned after the applicant failed to attend a scheduled mediation.

The Tribunal granted the request to amend the Response and removed the individual respondents, finding no compelling reason to keep them as parties.

The Tribunal declined to deem the application abandoned, noting that mediation is voluntary and the applicant had clarified his intention to proceed.

Doxtdator v. Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board, 2011 HRTO 605

Paul H. Starkman

In Private Practice152 cases2002–2026

Douglas Sanderson

Practising Law - Employed33 cases2007–2025

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

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of sex, pregnancy, and gender identity.

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

The Tribunal waited the customary time before proceeding.

Satisfied that the applicant had notice of the hearing, the Tribunal dismissed the application due to the applicant's non-attendance.

Shari Breziuk v. Treco Real Estate Limited and David Demerino, 2011 HRTO 584

Cheryl Ellison

Douglas Sanderson

Licence Surrendered - Retired31 cases1986–2017

Human rights application alleging disability discrimination in employment supports program dismissed at summary hearing.

The applicant alleged discrimination on the basis of disability (Obsessive Compulsive Disorder) against the Ministry of Community and Social Services and an individual respondent in connection with the ODSP Employment Supports program.

The respondents requested a summary hearing to dismiss the application.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's complaints were directed at the third-party service provider, Insight Enterprises, and there was no evidence linking the respondents' actions to a prohibited ground of discrimination.

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

Youssef v. Ontario (Community and Social Services), 2011 HRTO 582

Paula Rusak

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMar 18, 2011

Human rights application dismissed for delay; applicant failed to establish good faith for five-year delay.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment based on disability and age, over five years after his forced retirement.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss due to the delay.

The applicant argued the delay was due to family issues and his belief that the respondent had made clerical errors.

The Tribunal found the delay was not incurred in good faith, as the applicant failed to act with reasonable diligence to uncover the alleged discrimination.

The application was dismissed.

John Garland v. City of Kitchener, 2011 HRTO 562

Alanna P. Brogan

2 cases2011–2018

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 23, 2011

Breach of settlement application dismissed; confidentiality clause applied only to the applicant.

The applicant filed an application alleging that the respondents contravened a previous settlement by disclosing the Minutes of Settlement to their insurer.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the insurer had defended the respondents in the original application and was already aware of the settlement terms.

Additionally, the Tribunal noted that the confidentiality provision in the Minutes of Settlement explicitly applied only to the applicant, meaning the respondents were not bound by any confidentiality requirement regarding the settlement.

Aird v. McCollough, 2011 HRTO 398

Susan Adam Metzler

5 cases2010–2017

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 22, 2011

Human rights application dismissed; no evidence appraiser undervalued home due to anti-native bias.

The applicant alleged that the respondent appraiser discriminated against him in the provision of services by undervaluing his home due to its proximity to the Douglas Creek Estates First Nations land dispute.

The applicant argued that the appraiser's use of the term 'native occupation' and his selection of comparators demonstrated an anti-native bias that negatively affected the appraisal.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding no evidence that the appraiser intentionally undervalued the property or that considering the unresolved land dispute as a factor in the neighbourhood's property values was discriminatory.

Owens v. Minnick & Company Appraisers Ltd., 2011 HRTO 375

Douglas Sanderson

Tribunal gives non-responding corporate respondent a final deadline to file a Response.

The applicant filed an application alleging workplace discrimination and sexual harassment.

The corporate respondent Massilly named an additional corporate respondent, Contract Staffing Inc. Contract Staffing failed to file a Response despite multiple notices and directions from the Tribunal.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision giving Contract Staffing a final deadline of February 21, 2011 to file a Response, warning that failure to do so may result in the Tribunal proceeding without further notice to them pursuant to Rule 5.5.

Japal v. Massilly North America, 2011 HRTO 300

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to attend mediation or respond.

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

The parties agreed to attend mediation, but the applicant failed to appear.

The Tribunal directed the applicant to advise of his intentions and warned that failure to respond would result in the application being deemed abandoned.

The applicant did not respond.

The Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Ronald Hamilton v. Laurysen Kitchens Ltd., 2011 HRTO 299

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 11, 2011

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

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging that her employment was terminated because of her disability and because she sought accommodation.

The applicant's union had also filed a grievance regarding the termination.

The respondent and the union requested that the Tribunal defer the application pending the completion of the grievance process.

The Tribunal found that the termination was inextricably linked to the human rights issues raised in the application and that the grievance would likely address them.

The Tribunal deferred the application pending the completion of the grievance process.

Galina Oussatcheva v. University of Toronto, 2011 HRTO 293

Affected Party

Toronto Police ServiceSelf-represented
1 appearance

Applicant

Nina SouroushSelf-represented
1 appearance
Changhyun ParkSelf-represented
1 appearance
Bailee BuckmaterSelf-represented
1 appearance
Ardalan RobatiSelf-represented
1 appearance
Coleen JacobSelf-represented
1 appearance
Lewis HoppsSelf-represented
1 appearance
Emmanuel OxleySelf-represented
1 appearance
Nathalie CarrierSelf-represented
1 appearance
Leslie AustinSelf-represented
1 appearance
Sabina MulosmaniSelf-represented
1 appearance
Diana BoltinskySelf-represented
1 appearance
Stephanie TarczySelf-represented
1 appearance
Joseph WhitwellSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kevin WerbeskiAgent
1 appearance
Donna RyderSelf-represented
1 appearance
John GarlandSelf-represented
1 appearance
Warner GrovumSelf-represented
1 appearance
Liudmila GubrenkoSelf-represented
1 appearance
Clayton FullerSelf-represented
1 appearance
Garfield SimmsSelf-represented
1 appearance

Counsel

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

Counsel for the Respondent

Daphne FedorukCounsel
1 appearance
Catherine ConradCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Respondents

Glenn ChristieCounsel
1 appearance
Patricia G. MurrayCounsel
1 appearance

for 1103531 Ontario Inc., c.o.b. as Video Plus

Pieter JoubertCounsel
1 appearance

for Atikokan Native Friendship Centre

Carolyn KayCounsel
1 appearance

for Bennett Health Care Centre

Brent ForemanCounsel
1 appearance

for Bill Tough

Robert HealeyCounsel
1 appearance

for Bruyere Continuing Care, Pamela Eisener-Parsche and Anne Harley, Respondents

Jacquie DagherCounsel
1 appearance

for Canadian Federation of Independent Unions (CNFIU), Charlene Nero

Erin HallockCounsel
1 appearance

for Canadian Soccer Association

Richard SinclairCounsel
1 appearance

for Community Living Atikokan

Garth O’NeilCounsel
1 appearance

for Dr. Ronald Dykeman

Elizabeth GraceCounsel
1 appearance

for eHealth Ontario and Lynn Corkum

Mark A. StoneCounsel
1 appearance

for Essex County Soccer Association and Ontario Soccer Association

Robert RichlerCounsel
1 appearance

for Etobicoke Youth Soccer Club and Remo DiCarlo

Robert RichlerCounsel
1 appearance

for General Paint Corporation, Dick Glassford, and Horst Kreissler

Patrick GannonCounsel
1 appearance

for Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario

Taylor RansomCounsel
2 appearances

for Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care

Caroline CohenCounsel
1 appearance

for Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of the Attorney General

Sandra NishikawaCounsel
1 appearance

for herself

Ewa GulbinowiczSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Labourers’ Workers Union, LIUNA, Local 183

Tracey HenryCounsel
1 appearance

for Loop

Mr. GeigerCounsel
1 appearance

for Mano Sachithananthan

Mano SachithananthanSelf-represented
1 appearance

for MCI Medical Clinics Inc., Robert Carleton, and Sophie Ritchie

Alex Van KralingenCounsel
1 appearance

for Ontario Public Service Employees Union

Hillary CookCounsel
1 appearance

for Peter Bernotas, Marie-Josée Duchesne, Doreen Pierini, Nicole Gueigueirre

Jerry RasoCounsel
1 appearance

for Securitas Canada Limited

Dan McDonaldCounsel
1 appearance

for Shohiduzzaman Chayan

Jordan RumanekAgent
1 appearance

for Soler D&V Licensing (Thornhill) Inc. and Lori Soler

Alex SolerAgent
1 appearance

for St. Michael’s Hospital, Cheryl Adoranti, Catherine Valentini and Denise Wilson

Michelle HenryCounsel
1 appearance

for the Affected Parties

Allan McKitrickCounsel
1 appearance
Ansuya PachaiCounsel
1 appearance

for the Affected Party

Adrienne LiangCounsel
1 appearance
Robert HealeyCounsel
1 appearance
Sue LottCounsel
1 appearance

for the Affected Party, Toronto Police Service Board

Ansuya PachaiCounsel
1 appearance

for the applicant

Emily DenommeCounsel
1 appearance
Isabelle Roy-NunnCounsel
1 appearance
Mr. FisherCounsel
1 appearance

for the Applicant

Allen RosarioSelf-represented
6 appearances
Ronald IhaszSelf-represented
6 appearances
Wade PoziomkaCounsel
6 appearances
Jamie McGinnisCounsel
4 appearances
Cecil NormanAgent
4 appearances
Rhonda HowellsAgent
4 appearances
David ArmstrongSelf-represented
4 appearances
Danielle BisnarCounsel
4 appearances
Felix AmazanSelf-represented
3 appearances
Kate SellarCounsel
3 appearances
Shahenaz AlibhaiSelf-represented
3 appearances
Christine LundyAgent
3 appearances
David BakerCounsel
3 appearances
C.G.Self-represented
3 appearances
Sachchu KhanSelf-represented
3 appearances
Angela ManciniAgent
3 appearances
Katherine LinSelf-represented
3 appearances
Patrick JamesCounsel
3 appearances
Joseph WhitwellSelf-represented
2 appearances
Randy KingSelf-represented
2 appearances

for the Applicants

Karen SanchezCounsel
2 appearances
Roger LoveCounsel
1 appearance
Michelle BoyceSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kate SellarCounsel
1 appearance
E.L.Self-represented
1 appearance
Sharmaine HallCounsel
1 appearance

for the College of Nurses of Ontario

Katharine MontpetitCounsel
3 appearances
Raj AnandCounsel
3 appearances

for the Former Respondent

Brent ForemanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Interested Party

Peter HardingCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor

Jerry RasoCounsel
2 appearances
Kate HughesCounsel
1 appearance
Nini JonesCounsel
1 appearance
Geri SansonCounsel
1 appearance
Adam WebbCounsel
1 appearance
Paul O’RyanCounsel
1 appearance
Devon PaulCounsel
1 appearance
Tom RookeCounsel
1 appearance
Faisal BhabaCounsel
1 appearance
Elichai ShaffirCounsel
1 appearance
Anne GregoryCounsel
1 appearance
Elizabeth NurseCounsel
1 appearance
Alana MihaljCounsel
1 appearance
Lori KentCounsel
1 appearance
Mona StaplesCounsel
1 appearance
Jessica AmeyCounsel
1 appearance
Ryan GoldvineCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor Canadian Auto Workers' Union - Canada

Lewis GottheilCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor Canadian Civil Liberties Association

Sukanya PillayCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor, Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 1328

Devin PaulCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor Nishnawbe-Gamik Friendship Centre

Holly WalbourneCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor Ontario Nurses Association

Kate HughesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor Vaughan Professional Firefighters Association

Cynthia PetersenCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ontario Human Rights Commission

Cathy PikeCounsel
1 appearance

for the Pay Equity Office

Ayumi BaillyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Polish Mutual Benefit Society

Mark MikulasikCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed Respondent

Cindy CohenCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed Respondent Alan Jackson

William R. CounterCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed Respondent, Nishnawbe-Gamik Friendship Centre

Holly WalbourneCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed Respondents Rick Hampton and Dina Hampton

Stephen PanzerCounsel
1 appearance

for the respondent

Carolyn KayCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent

Paul MeierCounsel
6 appearances
Steve LavenderCounsel
5 appearances
Holly WalbourneCounsel
5 appearances
Brenda BowlbyCounsel
3 appearances
Bettina BurgessCounsel
3 appearances
Gita AnandCounsel
3 appearances
Marni TolenskyCounsel
3 appearances
Laura KarabulutCounsel
3 appearances
Jonathan MaierCounsel
3 appearances
Murray WrightSelf-represented
3 appearances
Kathryn BirdCounsel
3 appearances
Elisha Jamieson-DaviesCounsel
2 appearances
Shana FrenchCounsel
2 appearances
Carissa TanzolaCounsel
2 appearances
Sven PoysaCounsel
2 appearances
John-Paul AlexandrowiczCounsel
2 appearances
Ian SolomonCounsel
2 appearances
Mandy FricotCounsel
2 appearances
Jessica YoungCounsel
2 appearances
Margot BlightCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent 92085 Ontario Inc. o/a Final Touch Services & Alladin Carpet Cleaning

Rod GoodallAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Acclaim Ability Management Inc.

Thomas GorskyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Amalgamated Transit Union 1624

Lisa FinebergCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Bruce Lewis

Lawrence CrackowerCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 2713

Paul O’RyanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 32

Paul O’RyanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 79

Douglas WrayCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent CFJ Nuclear Contractors Ltd.

Richard CharneyCounsel
1 appearance
Daniel McDonaldCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Children and Family Services for York Region

Amelia DaurioCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Children's Aid Society of Ottawa

Carole JenkinsCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent C[...] Inc.

Gary BatasarCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent City of Sarnia

Steven WilsonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent City of Toronto

Darraugh MeagherCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent College of Nurses of Ontario

Raj AnandCounsel
2 appearances
Katharine MontpetitCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Days Inn Lundys Lane

Bradley TroupCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Domenic Alonzi

Enio ZeppieriCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Dr. Eric Spindler

Jennifer KatsunoCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent, Durham Children’s Aid Society

Vincent PanettaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent FCA Canada Inc.

Christopher DunnCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Garda World Cash Services Canada Corporation

Mathieu DuceppeCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Greater Essex County District School Board

Sheila MacKinnonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board

Jane GoodingCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Hamilton-Wentworth Elementary Teachers’ Local

Kate HughesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Her Majesty the Queen as represented by the Minister of Education

Rachel WeinerCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario

Taylor RansomCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Humber River Regional Hospital

Carolyn Cornford GreavesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 636

Craig FloodCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Kapuskasing Ontario Provincial Police

Fatema DadaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Kenneth Alexander

Kenneth AlexanderSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent Kevin Fox

Kevin FoxSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent King Township

M. David RossCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Leslie Perrin

Leslie PerrinSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent Manny Cardosa

James StewartCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Manulife Financial

Sophia ZaidiCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent, Middlesex-London Emergency Medical Services Authority

Stephanie JeronimoCounsel
1 appearance
John SaundersCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Millwright Regional Council of Ontario, Local 1592

Meg AtkinsonCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent Mohammad Reza Nikkhou

Jennifer KatsunoCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent North Eastern Ontario Family and Child Services

Justin EllertCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ontario Nurses Association

Colin JohnstonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ontario Soccer Association

Jessica DiFedericoCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ontario Universities’ Application Centre

Donald KiddCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Paul Armstrong

Glenn ChristieCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ralph Johnson

Jordan LesterCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent, Ralph Johnson

Jordan LesterCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent(s)

Carolyn Cornford GreavesCounsel
1 appearance
Daniel HuffakerCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents

Lynette D’SouzaCounsel
2 appearances
Nicole SmithCounsel
2 appearances
Greg BullenCounsel
2 appearances
Ken MacDonaldCounsel
2 appearances
Michael S. RichardsCounsel
2 appearances
Michael RichardsCounsel
2 appearances
Leslie FrattolinCounsel
2 appearances
Tina EarlCounsel
2 appearances
Patricia G. MurrayCounsel
2 appearances
Sunira ChaudhriCounsel
2 appearances
Ian JohnstoneCounsel
1 appearance
Marnie CorboldCounsel
1 appearance
Erin PorterAgent
1 appearance
Alix HerberCounsel
1 appearance
Peter ThorupCounsel
1 appearance
Jennifer RichardsCounsel
1 appearance
Erik KupkaCounsel
1 appearance
Paul H. StarkmanCounsel
1 appearance
Melissa ArrudaCounsel
1 appearance
Noel John HennessyAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondents and Proposed Respondents

Christopher SinalCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Bram Samaroo and Ryan Pitcher

Christopher McClellandCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Securitas Canada Limited

Daniel McDonaldCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondents Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario, Mathew Curran, Colleen Lee, Jennifer Mitchell and Sharron O’Halloran

Christine DaviesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Service Employees International Union Local 1 Canada

Helen NowakCounsel
1 appearance
Ken EvettUnion representative
1 appearance

for the Respondent Slovenian Linden Foundation

Jacinthe BoudreauCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent SM Medical Centre

Nadia MarottaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Peel District School Board, Mary Anne McArthur, Tina Morrison, Jan Courtin and Shirley Ann Teal

Roy FilionCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Susan Wall

Wade PoziomkaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents William Osler Heath System and Laura Albisu

Christopher ParkesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Winners Merchants International LP, Wendy Murcia, Marie-Jo Lemaire, Pierre Grenier, Natalina Ciarlo, Zeyna Erdogan and Abe Navarro

Allison TaylorCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Teamsters Union Local 419

Michael HancockCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Teamsters Union, Local 419

Michael HancockCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Teston Pipeline Limited

Michael HandlerCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Board of Health for the Toronto Health Unit

Fred FisherCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario

Monica TessierCounsel
1 appearance
Michelle GibbsCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Corporation of the City of Brantford

Heidi de VriesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Corporation of the City of Cambridge

Steve MathesonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Corporation of the City of Thunder Bay

Andrew ZabrovskyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Corporation of the City of Vaughan

Nancy SalernoCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Law Society of Upper Canada

Andrea GonsalvesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Ottawa Hospital

Jacquie DagherCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Ottawa Police Service

David PatacairkCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Regional Municipality of Waterloo Police Services Board

Donald JarvisCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Timmins and District Hospital

Jodi RussellAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Timmins Police Services

Elizabeth MontpetitCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Toyota Motor Manufacturing Canada Inc.

Ted KovacsCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent Trentway Wager / Coach Canada

Craig LawrenceCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent United Steelworkers of America, Local 9597

Shaheen HiraniCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent University of Ontario Institute of Technology

Cheryl FoyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent University of Windsor

David AmyotCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Victorian Order of Nurses

Sarah CrossleyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Workplace Safety and Insurance Board

Agnes WintersingerCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent, York Police Services Board

Stephen MaioCounsel
1 appearance

for the Toronto Catholic District School Board, Carrado Maltese, John Shain, Norma Rios, Jose Cayanan, and Sylvie Talarico

Paul MatthewsCounsel
1 appearance

for The Town of Parry Sound

Charles LoopstraCounsel
1 appearance

for the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board

Gurjit BrarCounsel
1 appearance

for Total Security Management

David McKechnieCounsel
1 appearance

for Unicco Facility Services Canada Company

Melanie McNaughtCounsel
1 appearance

for Unifor Canada, Local 1285, Leon Rideout and Ardis Snow, Respondents

Niki LundquistCounsel
1 appearance

Next Friend for Madison Reece

Rachel ChetwynAgent
1 appearance

Representative

Shaun CrymbleAgent
1 appearance

Representative for the Respondents

Judit SchonwaldAgent
1 appearance

Representative for Xiaorui Sun

Qizhi JiaoAgent
1 appearance

Respondent

Cheryl FoyCounsel
1 appearance
Iain DonnellCounsel
1 appearance
Herman GrewalSelf-represented
1 appearance
Steven WilsonCounsel
1 appearance
Joyce TravagliniAgent
1 appearance
Said KarimiSelf-represented
1 appearance
Paula RusakCounsel
1 appearance

Respondents

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

Self-represented

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

667

Decisions

Years active

Tribunals

3.8

cases/mo

HRTO663(99%)

OPEHT4(1%)

Decision types

motion

611

trial

/Adjudicator

Douglas Sanderson — Vice-Chair

Human Rights

Administrative Law

Employment and Labour Law

Other Tribunals

Landlord and Tenant

Bankruptcy and Insolvency Law

Workplace Safety and Insurance Law

Indigenous Legal Issues

Family and Matrimonial Law

Health Law

Douglas Sanderson

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

OPEHT HRTO

667

cases · 15 yrs · HRTO, OPEHT

Trial

Motion

Costs

Appeal

Sentencing

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

Mr. Geiger

3 cases2009–2011

Mr. Fisher

2 cases2011–2017

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 5, 2011

Adjournment denied where corporate respondent lacked assets and personnel to instruct counsel.

The corporate respondent, which had no employees or assets and whose owner was bankrupt, renewed its request to adjourn the scheduled hearing.

The Tribunal denied the adjournment, finding that the lack of an instructing party was not a new circumstance and adjourning the hearing would not resolve the issue.

The Tribunal also noted that the respondent had ample time to seek instructions from the insurer.

Dale Mead v. Loop Enterprise Inc., 2011 HRTO 879

Carole Jenkins

38 cases2001–2026

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 3, 2011

Application alleging breach of settlement dismissed as respondent fulfilled its obligation to provide an information sheet.

The applicant filed an application alleging that the respondent breached the minutes of settlement from a previous human rights application.

The settlement required the respondent to create a plain language information sheet outlining restrictions for youths applying for social assistance and to provide a copy to the applicant.

The applicant acknowledged receiving the document but objected to the substance of the respondent's policy.

Basic v. Covenant House, 2011 HRTO 861

Matthew Fisher

3 cases2011–2013

Mark Geiger

In Private Practice12 cases1986–2016

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 21, 2011

Adjournment request denied due to lack of exceptional circumstances; parties directed to fulfill disclosure obligations.

The corporate respondent requested an adjournment of the hearing to obtain instructions from its insurer and gather documents.

The applicant opposed the request, noting the late stage of the proceedings and the significant costs of travelling from overseas.

The Tribunal denied the adjournment, finding no exceptional circumstances to justify the late request.

The Tribunal also directed both parties to comply with their pre-hearing disclosure obligations, including the provision of detailed witness statements.

Mead v. Loop Enterprises, 2011 HRTO 810

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 15, 2011

Human rights application dismissed as out of time; pursuing other remedies did not excuse delay.

The application was filed more than one year after the last alleged incident of discrimination.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss.

The applicant argued the delay was due to pursuing a Ministry of Labour complaint and ignorance of her rights under the Code.

The Tribunal found that pursuing other legal remedies and ignorance of rights without reasonable inquiry did not constitute a good faith explanation for the delay.

The application was dismissed as out of time.

Grossi v. York Lanes Health Centre, 2011 HRTO 732

Patricia G. Murray

35 cases1990–2017

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 12, 2011

Tribunal strikes untimely allegations and removes individual respondents from human rights application.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment based on disability, citing incidents from 2005 and his termination in 2009.

The respondents requested to strike the 2005 allegations for delay and to remove the individual respondents.

The applicant requested to add another individual respondent.

The Tribunal also removed the individual respondents and denied the request to add another, as the corporate respondent could adequately respond to and remedy the alleged conduct.

Whitwell v. U.S. Steel Canada, 2011 HRTO 670

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 7, 2011

Reconsideration request denied as applicant failed to establish criteria under Rule 26.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his application alleging his home was undervalued due to discrimination.

The applicant argued that the adjudicator improperly admitted testimony that was not disclosed prior to the hearing.

Owens v. Minnick & Company Appraisers, 2011 HRTO 671

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 4, 2011

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of related Employment Standards Act review proceeding.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of sex (pregnancy) after her employment was terminated.

She also filed a claim under the Employment Standards Act (ESA) for the same events, which resulted in an order to pay in her favour.

The respondent requested a review of the ESA decision by the Ontario Labour Relations Board and sought to defer the human rights application pending the outcome of that review.

The Tribunal granted the request, finding that deferral was appropriate to avoid concurrent proceedings and inconsistent decisions, given the similar issues and potential for overlapping remedies.

Ahmed v. Bains Foods Inc. c.o.b. as Tim Hortons, 2011 HRTO 641

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed for delay as it was filed outside the one-year limitation period.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss because the application was filed outside the one-year statutory limitation period under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The application was dismissed as the delay was not incurred in good faith.

Janet Brown v. Vigour Limited Partnership LWI Cheltenham and David Cutler, 2011 HRTO 636

Douglas Sanderson

Request to proceed granted after union grievance withdrawn.

The applicant filed a Request to proceed under Rule 14.3 after a grievance filed with his union was withdrawn.

Neither the respondent nor the union responded to the Request.

The Tribunal found the Request to proceed appropriate and granted it, directing the Registrar to process the Application in the normal course.

Frank Mazzei v. General Motors of Canada, 2011 HRTO 635

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 scheduled a mediation session, but the Notice of Mediation sent to the applicant was returned by Canada Post indicating she had moved.

The Tribunal was unable to contact the applicant by phone and sent correspondence warning that the application would be deemed abandoned if she did not respond within 10 days.

The applicant failed to respond.

The Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Sretana Novic v. Loyalty One Inc., 2011 HRTO 615

Douglas Sanderson

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

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment based on sexual solicitation or advances.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because the application lacked information regarding the alleged unwelcome sexual solicitation.

The applicant failed to respond to the Notice by the specified deadline.

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

Laurier Madore v. Sears Canada, 2011 HRTO 613

Jane Gooding

15 cases2009–2018

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMar 28, 2011

Tribunal allows respondents to amend Response and removes individual respondents, but declines to deem application abandoned.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on various grounds.

The Tribunal granted the request to amend the Response and removed the individual respondents, finding no compelling reason to keep them as parties.

The Tribunal declined to deem the application abandoned, noting that mediation is voluntary and the applicant had clarified his intention to proceed.

Doxtdator v. Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board, 2011 HRTO 605

Paul H. Starkman

In Private Practice152 cases2002–2026

Douglas Sanderson

Practising Law - Employed33 cases2007–2025

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

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of sex, pregnancy, and gender identity.

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

The Tribunal waited the customary time before proceeding.

Satisfied that the applicant had notice of the hearing, the Tribunal dismissed the application due to the applicant's non-attendance.

Shari Breziuk v. Treco Real Estate Limited and David Demerino, 2011 HRTO 584

Cheryl Ellison

Douglas Sanderson

Licence Surrendered - Retired31 cases1986–2017

Human rights application alleging disability discrimination in employment supports program dismissed at summary hearing.

The respondents requested a summary hearing to dismiss the application.

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

Youssef v. Ontario (Community and Social Services), 2011 HRTO 582

Paula Rusak

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMar 18, 2011

Human rights application dismissed for delay; applicant failed to establish good faith for five-year delay.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment based on disability and age, over five years after his forced retirement.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss due to the delay.

The applicant argued the delay was due to family issues and his belief that the respondent had made clerical errors.

The Tribunal found the delay was not incurred in good faith, as the applicant failed to act with reasonable diligence to uncover the alleged discrimination.

The application was dismissed.

John Garland v. City of Kitchener, 2011 HRTO 562

Alanna P. Brogan

2 cases2011–2018

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 23, 2011

Breach of settlement application dismissed; confidentiality clause applied only to the applicant.

The applicant filed an application alleging that the respondents contravened a previous settlement by disclosing the Minutes of Settlement to their insurer.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the insurer had defended the respondents in the original application and was already aware of the settlement terms.

Aird v. McCollough, 2011 HRTO 398

Susan Adam Metzler

5 cases2010–2017

Douglas Sanderson

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 22, 2011

Human rights application dismissed; no evidence appraiser undervalued home due to anti-native bias.

The applicant argued that the appraiser's use of the term 'native occupation' and his selection of comparators demonstrated an anti-native bias that negatively affected the appraisal.

Owens v. Minnick & Company Appraisers Ltd., 2011 HRTO 375

Douglas Sanderson

Tribunal gives non-responding corporate respondent a final deadline to file a Response.

The applicant filed an application alleging workplace discrimination and sexual harassment.

Japal v. Massilly North America, 2011 HRTO 300

Douglas Sanderson

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to attend mediation or respond.

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

The parties agreed to attend mediation, but the applicant failed to appear.

The Tribunal directed the applicant to advise of his intentions and warned that failure to respond would result in the application being deemed abandoned.

The applicant did not respond.

The Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Ronald Hamilton v. Laurysen Kitchens Ltd., 2011 HRTO 299

Douglas Sanderson