Human rights application dismissed at summary hearing for lacking a reasonable prospect of success.
The applicant alleged discrimination on the basis of race, ancestry, and ethnic origin after being banned from a Video Plus store that operated as a Sears catalogue agent.
The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application had a reasonable prospect of success.
The applicant claimed he was denied service because of his Polish surname, while the respondent maintained he was banned due to abusive behaviour towards an employee.
The Tribunal found no evidence linking the denial of service to a prohibited ground and dismissed the application.
Request to add successor corporation as respondent denied; Code lacks successor employer provisions.
The applicant filed a request for an order to add a proposed corporate respondent, alleging that the original corporate respondent transferred its assets to avoid liability.
The Tribunal held that it lacks jurisdiction to add a party solely on the basis of successor or related employer principles, as the Human Rights Code does not contain such provisions.
Applying the test for adding a respondent, the Tribunal found no allegations that the proposed respondent violated the Code, as it was allegedly created after the application was filed.
The request was denied.
Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to provide respondent's address.
The applicant filed an application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.
The Tribunal attempted to deliver the Notice of Application to the respondent twice, but both times the mail was returned as 'Moved/Unknown'.
The Tribunal issued an Interim Decision ordering the applicant to provide a current, complete, and accurate address for the respondent within 20 days.
The applicant failed to comply with the order.
Consequently, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.
Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to request reactivation following ESA settlement.
The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of sex and pregnancy, as well as a related claim under the Employment Standards Act (ESA).
The Tribunal deferred the application pending the disposition of the ESA claim.
After the ESA claim was settled, the applicant failed to request reactivation of her human rights application within the 60-day period required by Rule 14.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.
Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to provide respondents' correct contact information.
The Tribunal's attempt to deliver the Notice of Application to the respondents was returned to sender.
The Tribunal directed the applicant to provide correct contact information or explain why the provided information was accurate, warning that failure to respond could result in dismissal.
The applicant failed to respond.
The Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.
Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Tribunal's status inquiry.
The applicant filed an application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, which was deferred pending the conclusion of ongoing grievance proceedings.
The Tribunal later requested an update on the status of the grievance proceedings, warning that failure to respond could result in dismissal for abandonment.
The applicant failed to respond to the Tribunal's inquiry.
Consequently, the application was deemed abandoned and dismissed.
Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Tribunal's status request.
The applicant filed an application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, which the Tribunal deferred pending the conclusion of ongoing grievance proceedings.
The Tribunal subsequently requested a status update from the applicant regarding the grievance proceedings, warning that failure to respond could result in the application being dismissed as abandoned.
The applicant did not respond to the request.
As a result, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.