Ena Chadha is a vice-chair at the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario with 867 decisions on record from 2008 to 2014. Key areas include human rights, employment and labour law, administrative law.

What tribunal does Ena Chadha sit on?

Ena Chadha sits on the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.

What areas of law does Ena Chadha decide?

Ena Chadha's most common areas include Human Rights (867 decisions), Employment and Labour Law (371 decisions), Administrative Law (238 decisions). Ena Chadha has handled 867 decisions across 10 areas.

How many decisions has Ena Chadha made?

Ena Chadha has 867 decisions on record from 2008 to 2014.

Who frequently appears before Ena Chadha?

Representatives who frequently appear before Ena Chadha include Self-represented, Patrick James, Mandy Eason.

/Adjudicator

minicounsel

Ena Chadha — Vice-Chair

Human Rights

Employment and Labour Law

Administrative Law

Other Tribunals

Landlord and Tenant

Workplace Safety and Insurance Law

Bankruptcy and Insolvency Law

Workers' Compensation

Health Law

Family and Matrimonial Law

Ena Chadha

Vice-Chair·Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario·Since 2008

867

cases · 7 yrs · HRTO

Trial

Motion

Costs

Appeal

Sentencing

Vice-chair· 700Vice-chair· 103Adjudicator· 35Vice-Chair· 16Adjudicator· 7Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario· 2Vice-Chair· 2Vice Chair· 1

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioFeb 2, 2012

Human rights application deferred on consent pending completion of concurrent grievance proceeding.

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

The applicant requested that the application be deferred pending the completion of a concurrent grievance before the Grievance Settlement Board.

The respondents consented to the deferral.

The Tribunal ordered the application deferred to avoid concurrent proceedings and the possibility of inconsistent decisions.

Iman Hamed v. Ministry of Revenue, Government of Ontario and Adrienne Leopold, 2012 HRTO 242

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 31, 2012

Request for interim order to construct temporary wheelchair ramp dismissed due to balance of convenience.

The applicant, who has a mobility disability, filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in housing after the respondent co-operative removed a wheelchair ramp.

The applicant requested an interim remedy ordering the respondent to construct a temporary ramp.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding that the applicant failed to establish that the balance of convenience favoured the interim remedy, given the respondent's concerns regarding building code compliance, insurance, and encroachment.

Cecila Keefer v. Fifty-Four Rideau Terrace Investments Ltd. o/a 54 Rideau Terrace Investments, 2012 HRTO 224

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 30, 2012

Human rights application reactivated after applicant withdrew her concurrent grievance.

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

The applicant provided evidence that she instructed her union to withdraw the grievance and that the arbitrator subsequently dismissed it.

As the concurrent grievance process had concluded and the respondents did not file a response, the Tribunal granted the request to reactivate the application.

Lisa Nash v. Ottawa-Carleton District School Board and Barry Armstrong, 2012 HRTO 216

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 30, 2012

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to attend mediation and update contact information.

The applicant filed a human rights application but failed to attend a scheduled mediation.

The Tribunal's attempts to contact the applicant were unsuccessful due to outdated contact information.

When reached by telephone, the applicant verbally advised that he did not wish to continue with the application.

The Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Wieslaw Turlejski v. Toronto Community Housing Corporation and Access Housing Connections Inc., 2012 HRTO 217

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 27, 2012

Request to reactivate deferred human rights application denied as grievance process remained ongoing.

The applicant filed a Request for Order During Proceedings to reactivate his human rights application, which had been deferred pending the conclusion of his grievance process.

The applicant argued that his grievances had been placed in abeyance.

The respondent opposed reactivation, providing evidence that the grievances had been referred to arbitration and remained outstanding.

The Tribunal denied the request to reactivate, finding that the grievance process was not yet concluded and that allowing the application to proceed would result in concurrent legal proceedings, contrary to the purpose of deferral.

Dan Norland v. The Corporation of the City of Thunder Bay, 2012 HRTO 200

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 27, 2012

Human rights application dismissed for delay; pursuing internal academic appeals did not justify late filing.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination by the respondent university regarding his removal from a physical therapy program.

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

The applicant argued the delay was justified because he was pursuing internal academic appeals.

The Tribunal found that pursuing internal appeals does not constitute a valid explanation for delay and concluded the delay was not incurred in good faith.

The application was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Jing Huo v. University of Western Ontario, 2012 HRTO 198

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 26, 2012

Human rights application dismissed for delay as waiting for WSIB proceedings did not constitute good faith.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal in employment approximately three years after his dismissal.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss for delay.

The applicant argued the delay was due to his health and ongoing WSIB proceedings.

The Tribunal found that waiting for other legal proceedings does not justify delay and that the applicant failed to provide medical evidence showing his disability prevented him from filing on time.

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

Milijan Jovanovic v. City of Hamilton, 2012 HRTO 201

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 23, 2012

Tribunal ordered limited disclosure of applicant's medical files to respondents for preparing their human rights response.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal based on disability regarding her workplace accommodation and transitional work program.

Prior to filing their Response, the respondents requested an order for disclosure of the applicant's occupational health and claims management files, arguing the documents were necessary to respond to the allegations.

The Tribunal found the health files were arguably relevant to the issues in dispute but limited the temporal scope of disclosure to January 2009 onwards to protect the applicant's privacy.

The Tribunal granted the respondents access to the limited files, restricted use to those preparing the Response, and granted a 35-day extension to file the Response.

O’Brien v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2012 HRTO 170

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 20, 2012

Human rights application reactivated after concurrent union grievances were withdrawn from arbitration.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment, which was previously deferred pending the outcome of concurrent union grievances.

After the union withdrew the grievances from arbitration, the applicant requested to reactivate the application.

The Tribunal granted the request to reactivate as there were no longer concurrent legal proceedings, and identified several preliminary issues to be addressed in a subsequent Case Assessment Direction.

Vasquez v. Mount Sinai Hospital, 2012 HRTO 157

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 20, 2012

Human rights application deferred pending resolution of concurrent union grievances proceeding to arbitration.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal based on disability and record of offences.

The respondents requested that the Tribunal defer the application because the applicant had also filed union grievances based on the same facts and issues, which were proceeding to expedited arbitration.

The Tribunal found significant overlap between the application and the grievances and noted that grievance arbitrators have the power and responsibility to enforce human rights obligations.

To avoid concurrent proceedings and inconsistent findings, the Tribunal ordered the deferral of the application pending the conclusion of the arbitration process.

Cyndi Lafond v. South Essex Community Council and Caroyln Warkentin, 2012 HRTO 161

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 19, 2012

Reconsideration request denied due to unexplained delay and failure to meet substantive criteria.

The applicant filed a request for reconsideration of an Interim Decision that removed a personal respondent and substituted the corporate employer as the respondent.

The request was filed more than six months after the 30-day deadline.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the applicant failed to provide a meaningful justification for the delay and did not establish good faith.

Furthermore, the Tribunal found that even if timely, the request did not meet any of the substantive criteria for reconsideration under Rule 26.

Laura Fry v. Running Room Canada Inc., 2012 HRTO 149

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 18, 2012

Tribunal allowed human rights application to proceed after applicant provided supplementary details responding to a Notice of Intent to Dismiss.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in services based on disability, family status, and reprisal.

The Tribunal initially issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (NOID) on the basis that the application appeared to lack specific allegations of discrimination.

After the applicant provided supplementary submissions detailing alleged harassment and reprisal related to his PTSD and a previous human rights complaint, the Tribunal found it was not plain and obvious that the application fell outside its jurisdiction.

The Tribunal ordered the application to be processed and served on the respondents.

Dixon v. The Brick Warehouse, 2012 HRTO 136

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 17, 2012

Request to amend human rights application to add respondents and allegations granted on consent.

The applicant filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings to amend his human rights application to add two respondents and two new allegations.

The respondents consented to the proposed amendments on the condition that they be permitted to amend their Response.

The Tribunal granted the request, noting the early stage of the proceedings, the lack of prejudice, and the respondents' consent.

Markarian v. Niagara Regional Police Service, 2012 HRTO 125

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 17, 2012

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to request to dismiss.

The applicant filed an application alleging employment discrimination on the basis of age and record of offences.

The respondent requested dismissal, arguing the parties had entered into Minutes of Settlement and the applicant had signed a full and final release.

The Tribunal directed the applicant to provide written submissions responding to the request to dismiss.

The applicant failed to respond by the deadline.

The Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Pauline Sra v. Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, 2012 HRTO 128

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 12, 2012

Application dismissed against individual respondent due to applicant's failure to provide accurate contact information.

The applicant filed a human rights application against a corporate respondent and an individual respondent.

The individual respondent's copy of the application was returned because they were no longer employed by the corporate respondent.

The Tribunal directed the applicant to provide a current address for the individual respondent or file a request for an order during proceedings to compel the corporate respondent to provide it.

The applicant failed to do so.

The Tribunal dismissed the application as against the individual respondent pursuant to Rule 6.6(b) of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

Archer v. Green Earth Environmental Products, 2012 HRTO 70

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 11, 2012

Tribunal allows adding omitted respondent but denies adding new respondent due to delay and lack of compelling reason.

The applicants in three consolidated human rights applications requested to add two personal respondents.

The Tribunal granted the request to add Morag Anderson to one application due to a clerical oversight, as she was already named in the narrative and other applications.

However, the Tribunal dismissed the request to add Leanne Tucker as a new respondent to all applications, applying the Smyth test.

The Tribunal found no compelling reason to add her, as the organizational respondent could adequately address the allegations and provide relief, and noted concerns about the applicants' delay in making the request.

Aubin v. Sudbury Sexual Assault Crisis Centre, 2012 HRTO 56

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 11, 2012

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent WSIB appeal involving same factual issues.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging disability discrimination and constructive dismissal due to the employer's failure to accommodate her physical restrictions.

The respondents requested that the Tribunal defer the application because the applicant was concurrently pursuing a WSIB appeal regarding the same factual issues.

The Tribunal found significant overlap between the factual allegations and legal issues in both proceedings and ordered the deferral of the human rights application pending the conclusion of the WSIB proceedings.

Heather Blackier v. Zellers Inc. and Sherry Young, 2012 HRTO 59

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 5, 2012

Human rights application dismissed due to concurrent civil action based on identical facts.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal on the basis of disability and sex following her dismissal upon attempting to return from short-term disability leave.

The respondent requested that the application be dismissed under section 34(11) of the Human Rights Code because the applicant had commenced a civil action for wrongful dismissal based on the same facts and seeking similar remedies.

The Tribunal found that the civil action and the application relied on identical facts and sought similar remedies, triggering the mandatory bar in section 34(11).

The application was dismissed.

Jarrett v. Vance, 2012 HRTO 24

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 4, 2012

Human rights application deferred pending resolution of concurrent workplace grievance on the same facts.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, specifically a failure to accommodate.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer because the applicant had also filed a workplace grievance based on the same facts and issues.

The applicant opposed deferral, while the employer noted the grievance was proceeding.

The applicant's union requested and was granted intervenor status.

The Tribunal ordered the application deferred pending the conclusion of the grievance to avoid concurrent proceedings and inconsistent decisions.

Daoust v. Sudbury Regional Hospital, 2012 HRTO 8

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJan 4, 2012

Tribunal declines to dismiss family status discrimination application for delay at preliminary stage.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of family status, claiming she was denied work shifts because she, her husband, and her mother were employed at the same place.

The Tribunal initially issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because the application appeared to be filed more than one year after the last alleged incident.

After reviewing the applicant's submissions alleging ongoing discrimination, the Tribunal found it was not plain and obvious that the application was out of time.

The Tribunal directed that the application be served on the respondents, who may raise the issue of delay in their response.

Unyi v. Durham Race Operations, 2012 HRTO 9

Page 19 of 44 (867 cases)

Applicant

Christopher PillonSelf-represented
1 appearance
David MolnarSelf-represented
1 appearance
Dubravko CvetkovicSelf-represented
1 appearance
Ekaterini AllagasSelf-represented
1 appearance
Gawain ColeySelf-represented
1 appearance
James CunninghamSelf-represented
1 appearance
Janet BergerSelf-represented
1 appearance
Joseph BriggsSelf-represented
1 appearance
Joseph ManimalethuSelf-represented
1 appearance
Mary DopelhamerSelf-represented
1 appearance
Mary HardmanSelf-represented
1 appearance
Michael TranchemontagneSelf-represented
1 appearance
Randall HermanSelf-represented
1 appearance
Richard VellaSelf-represented
1 appearance
Sandra BakshSelf-represented
1 appearance
Self-representedSelf-represented
1 appearance
Shirley GibsonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Susan TillerSelf-represented
1 appearance
Victor PakSelf-represented
1 appearance
Virgin ElginSelf-represented
1 appearance

Counsel

Brian P. SmeenkCounsel
2 appearances
Jennifer RichardsCounsel
1 appearance
Kate HughesCounsel
1 appearance
Mark A. StoneCounsel
1 appearance
Richard EliaCounsel
1 appearance
Sally BryantCounsel
1 appearance
Sarah ShodyCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for Michael Markicevic

James HeeneyCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for OPSEU

Eric O’BrienCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Ministry of Children and Youth Services

George ParrisCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Respondent

Michael HorvatCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Respondent Ontario Labour Relations Board

Leonard MarvyCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Respondent Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation

Simon BlackstoneCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Respondents

Bryan J. CrispCounsel
1 appearance
Justin HeimpelCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for York University

Brian WasyliwCounsel
1 appearance

for AMAPCEO, Affected Party

Elisa MesitiUnion representative
1 appearance

for Angela Mendoza-Baez

Angela Mendoza-BaezSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Angelo Foti

Lorenzo LisiCounsel
1 appearance

for Canada Safeway Limited

Paul YoungCounsel
1 appearance

for CAW-TCA Canada

Colette HoosonUnion representative
1 appearance

for Gary Klein

Susan ChapmanCounsel
1 appearance

for Habeeburrahiman Kavangal

Peter K. HrastovecCounsel
1 appearance

for himself

Faron HaydenSelf-represented
1 appearance
Rajanayagam BalaganthanSelf-represented
1 appearance
Rohan AbbeySelf-represented
1 appearance

for Jennette Frost

Ian WerkerCounsel
1 appearance

for Manulife Financial

Veronica MohanCounsel
1 appearance

for Melvin Herzog and Denise Jepersen

Glynnis BurtCounsel
1 appearance

for Menzies Chrysler Inc., Clark Menzies and Mark Lyons

Richard J. MazarCounsel
1 appearance

for Menzies Chrysler Incorporated, Clark Menzies, Mark Lyons

Richard J. MazarCounsel
1 appearance

for Michael Watson

Raj AnandCounsel
1 appearance

for Mohammed Manjra

Beth BeattieCounsel
1 appearance

for OPSEU

Adrienne LiangCounsel
1 appearance

for Paul Cohn

Paul CohnSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Securitas Canada Ltd., Lee McGee and Milroy Mariampillai

Daniel R. McDonaldCounsel
1 appearance

for Stanley Klimitz

Jack CopeloviciCounsel
1 appearance

for Stan Mei

Geoffrey BakerCounsel
1 appearance

for the Affected Party

Elizabeth NurseCounsel
3 appearances
Susan LuftCounsel
2 appearances
Heather AldenCounsel
1 appearance
Jorge V. HurtadoCounsel
1 appearance
Lorenzo LisiCounsel
1 appearance
Naomi CallaCounsel
1 appearance
Paul BoileuaCounsel
1 appearance
Paul O’RyanCounsel
1 appearance
Rebecca LeeCounsel
1 appearance
Dave SteeleCounsel
1 appearance

for the Affected Party Unite Here Local 75

Jorge HurtadoCounsel
1 appearance

for the Affected Party University of Western Ontario Faculty Association

John W.T. JudsonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Applicant

Self-representedSelf-represented
7 appearances
Patrick JamesCounsel
5 appearances
Tarek IbrahimSelf-represented
4 appearances
Douglas ChristieCounsel
4 appearances
Mark ThomasSelf-represented
3 appearances
Maria RotsSelf-represented
3 appearances
Barbara KueberSelf-represented
3 appearances
Michael ChristiansonSelf-represented
3 appearances
Cecil NormanAgent
3 appearances
Shawn BinghamSelf-represented
3 appearances
Lina AhmedSelf-represented
2 appearances
Mary MackinnonCounsel
2 appearances
Ronald IhaszSelf-represented
2 appearances
Thomas PeacockAgent
2 appearances
Nana Kow KuffuorSelf-represented
2 appearances
Farah MalikCounsel
2 appearances
Galina OkounevaSelf-represented
2 appearances
Neallos WedemireSelf-represented
2 appearances
Nelson RunnallsSelf-represented
2 appearances
Karina VilnerSelf-represented
2 appearances

for the Applicant Afat Ahmadli

Karina VilnerAgent
1 appearance

for the Applicant Karina Vilner

Karina VilnerSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Applicants

John VillellaAgent
1 appearance
Marcia CannerAgent
1 appearance
John HowarthSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Board of Governors of Exhibition Place

Naomi CallaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Commission

Anthony GriffinCounsel
2 appearances
Bay RyleyCounsel
2 appearances
Isfahan MeraliCounsel
1 appearance
Megan Evans MaxwellCounsel
1 appearance
Melanie ShulmanCounsel
1 appearance
Prabhu RajanCounsel
1 appearance
Kikee MalikCounsel
1 appearance

for the Complainant

Mandy EasonCounsel
5 appearances
Kimberly R. MurrayCounsel
4 appearances
Raj AnandCounsel
2 appearances
Paul McKeeverCounsel
2 appearances
Amanda DriscollCounsel
1 appearance

for the Complainants

Jane LettonAgent
1 appearance
Jane LettonCounsel
1 appearance

for The Governing Council of Salvation Army in Canada

Blair McCreadieCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervener

Michael DunnCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor

Jeff AndrewCounsel
2 appearances
Evan SchillerCounsel
2 appearances
Shaheen HiraniCounsel
1 appearance
Catherine DavisUnion representative
1 appearance
Cathy BrakerCounsel
1 appearance
Colette HoosonUnion representative
1 appearance
David WrightCounsel
1 appearance
Deborah HowdenCounsel
1 appearance
Devon M. PaulCounsel
1 appearance
Emma PhillipsCounsel
1 appearance
Gavin LeebCounsel
1 appearance
Giuseppe AgostinoCounsel
1 appearance
Jeffery AndrewCounsel
1 appearance
Jerry RasoCounsel
1 appearance
Jessica KearsleyCounsel
1 appearance
Mark WrightCounsel
1 appearance
Melissa KronickCounsel
1 appearance
Mona StaplesUnion representative
1 appearance
Rick LerouxUnion representative
1 appearance
Robert ChampagneCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor CAW Canada Local 4266

Mike ArmstrongUnion representative
1 appearance

for the Intervenor Teamster Canada Rail Conference, Division 660

Denis EllicksonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ministry of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Marion Crane, Helmut Zissert

Roslyn BachiooCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ontario Human Rights Commission

Brian SmithCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ontario Labour Relations Board

Leonard MarvyAgent
1 appearance

for the Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation

Simon BlackstoneAgent
1 appearance

for the Personal Respondent

Craig R. ColraineCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed Intervener

Michael DunnCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed Intervenor

Michael DoiCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed Respondent

Garth KiddCounsel
1 appearance
Adam BeattyCounsel
1 appearance
Karen InselsbacherCounsel
1 appearance
Paula M. RusakCounsel
1 appearance
Peter KrysiakCounsel
1 appearance
Tammy W. Grove-McClementCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed Respondents

Zachary GreenCounsel
2 appearances

for the Proposed Respondent V.I.

V.I.Self-represented
1 appearance

for The Regional Municipality of Peel

John GescherCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent

Tracy A. KayCounsel
3 appearances
Donna PolgarCounsel
3 appearances
Michelle A. AltonCounsel
3 appearances
Caroline V. JonesCounsel
3 appearances
Michelle WrightCounsel
2 appearances
Adrienne CoutoCounsel
2 appearances
Sari L. SpringerCounsel
2 appearances
Karen SargeantCounsel
2 appearances
Roger R. MillsCounsel
2 appearances
Paul MeierCounsel
2 appearances
Carol VandenHoekCounsel
2 appearances
Jennifer RichardsCounsel
2 appearances
Carolyn JohnstonCounsel
2 appearances
Karen JensenCounsel
2 appearances
Philip DayAgent
2 appearances
Andrea M. DedrickCounsel
2 appearances
Raquel ChisholmCounsel
2 appearances
James D. HigginsonCounsel
1 appearance
James G. KnightCounsel
1 appearance
Allen V. CraigCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent 1243564 Ontario Limited o/a Total Scrap Management

Kathleen E. AndrewCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Aditya Birla Minacs Worldwide Inc.

Kathryn J. BirdCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Amalgamated Transit Union Local 113

Carlo Di GiovanniCounsel
1 appearance
Katherine RowanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent and Proposed Respondent

Kyle D. BurgisCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Angela Tesseris

Angela TesserisSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent Bombardier Transportation Canada Inc.

Sarah CrossleyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Brinks Canada Ltd

George VassosCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Christopher Fitkin

Melany FranklinCounsel
3 appearances

for the Respondent C[...] Inc.

F.H.Agent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Clinicare Health Services Wonderland Ltd.

Christopher A. SinalCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent CN National Railway Company

Jacynthe GirardCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Crossby Dewar Inc.

Carissa TanzolaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Domclean Limited

Robert J. AtkinsonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Eve Tsai

Denyse BouletCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Gilmore Investments Corporation – Gilmore Global

Colleen DunlopCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Great West Life-Scarborough Disability Office

Susan McCorquodaleCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Hamilton Wentworth District School Board

Mark ZegaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Henniges Automotive

Christopher FioreCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Henry Rivas

Christa L. ReaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Hilton Toronto Hotel

Michelle A. AltonCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent H.S.

H.S.Self-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent Jason Bacchiochi

Ann MitchellCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Jeffry McMaster

Elizabeth K.P. GraceCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Joe Boute and Intervenor United Steelworkers Local 455

Robert HealyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Kenneth Swan

David C. MooreCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Kiran Panikar

Kiran PanikarSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services

Cathy PhanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Mitsume Fukui

Michael KlugCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Naeem Muhammed

Jenny StephensonCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent Nancy Dell’Osso

Nancy Dell’OssoSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent Norman J. Groot

Allison TaylorCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ontario Public Service Employees Union

Ed HolmesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation

Joshua S. PhillipsCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents

Lucy SiracoCounsel
3 appearances
Glenn ChuCounsel
3 appearances
Deborah HowdenCounsel
2 appearances
Andrea GonsalvesCounsel
2 appearances
Kevin MacNeillCounsel
2 appearances
Daryn M. JefferiesCounsel
2 appearances
Michele WrightCounsel
2 appearances
Kristin TaylorCounsel
2 appearances
Daryn M. JeffriesCounsel
2 appearances
Lisa Washington-WattsCounsel
2 appearances
Jennifer RichardsCounsel
2 appearances
Zoya TrofimenkoCounsel
2 appearances
Daniel R. McDonaldCounsel
2 appearances
Jordana K. JosephCounsel
1 appearance
Joseph TasconaCounsel
1 appearance
Karen JensenCounsel
1 appearance
Katherine FordCounsel
1 appearance
Katherine PollockCounsel
1 appearance
Kelsey OrthCounsel
1 appearance
Kevin InwoodCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Canadian Union of Public Employees Ontario Division and CUPE 4153

Elizabeth NurseCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario and Elizabetta De Santis

Mandy WojcikCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Jodie Huber and Rick Pereira

Karimjee GreeneCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Margaret Laurence Housing Co-operative, Julie Murphy, Debbie August-Moffatt, Stephen English, Raymond Ouellet, March Smith, Napolean Muisa, Dumo Siziba and Lisa Forestell

Luke J. SaitesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents The Corporation of the City of Mississauga, Pam Hooke, Mickey Frost and Dara Marcoccia

Erin R. KuzzCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents The University of Western Ontario, Donne Penne and Lisa Ann Korab

Barry J. BrownCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Sudbury Regional Hospital

Diane BarbeauAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent, The Corporation of the County of Grey

Andrea M. DedrickCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Ottawa Hospital

Andre ChampagneCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Toronto District School Board

Grant BowersCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent Toronto Police Services Board

Glenn ChuCounsel
2 appearances
Antonella CeddiaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Toronto Transit Commission

Marni TolenskyCounsel
1 appearance
Patricia MatusiakCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent University of Ottawa

Karen JensenCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Workplace Safety and Insurance Board

Gurjit BrarCounsel
1 appearance

for the Toronto Police Services Board, Officer Ruttner and Officer Taylor

Michele WrightCounsel
1 appearance

for the Union

Ryan GoldvineUnion representative
1 appearance

for the United Steelworkers, Local 9042

Cathy BrakerCounsel
1 appearance

for Tom Graham

Paul D. MackCounsel
2 appearances

for United Food & Commercial Workers Canada, Locals 175 & 633

Erin WallaceCounsel
1 appearance

for United Steel Workers, Local 5296, and Joe Bonsu

Shaheen HiraniCounsel
1 appearance

for William Blair

Sie-Wing KhowCounsel
1 appearance

for William Blair, Chief of Police

Sie-Wing KhowCounsel
1 appearance

for Windsor Casino Limited and Joe Moore

Nancy Jummu-TaylorCounsel
1 appearance

Intervenor

Ryan GoldvineCounsel
1 appearance

On her own behalf

Gina CiampaSelf-represented
1 appearance
Cheryl McDonaldSelf-represented
1 appearance
Gayathri SeetharamSelf-represented
1 appearance
Anica VisicSelf-represented
1 appearance

On Her Own Behalf

Florips BajoucoSelf-represented
3 appearances
Caroline WedleySelf-represented
1 appearance
Melissa MarshallSelf-represented
1 appearance

On his own behalf

William ThomsonSelf-represented
1 appearance

On His Own Behalf

Gerrald StangretSelf-represented
1 appearance

Respondent

Brian GatienCounsel
1 appearance
Karen SargeantCounsel
1 appearance
Kevin D. SherkinCounsel
1 appearance
Ted KovacsCounsel
1 appearance
William DeplaedtSelf-represented
1 appearance

Respondents

John MoszynskiCounsel
1 appearance
Robert BaldwinCounsel
1 appearance
Zoya TrofimenkoCounsel
1 appearance

Self-represented

Juno StewartSelf-represented
1 appearance

867

Decisions

Years active

Tribunals

11.7

cases/mo

HRTO867(100%)

Decision types

motion

852

trial

Page 19 of 44 (867 cases)