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 OntarioJun 8, 2011

Request to dismiss human rights application denied as prior ESA settlement did not address discrimination allegations.

The respondents requested the dismissal of a human rights application under section 45.1 of the Human Rights Code, arguing that a prior Employment Standards Act (ESA) settlement appropriately dealt with the substance of the application.

The applicant opposed the request, asserting that the ESA settlement only addressed pregnancy leave and statutory severance, not her allegations of racial discrimination and harassment.

The Tribunal found that while the ESA settlement constituted a 'proceeding', it did not appropriately deal with the substance of the application because it did not address the race and gender discrimination allegations.

The request for dismissal was denied.

Ama Acheampomaah v. Clothing for Modern Times Ltd. and Omar Benidir, 2011 HRTO 1113

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 8, 2011

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of parallel OLRB complaint arising from same facts.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and harassment in employment on the basis of disability, and that he was dismissed because of his disability.

The applicant's union had previously filed an unfair labour practice complaint with the Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB) arising from the same factual circumstances.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer the application pending the resolution of the OLRB proceeding.

Despite the applicant's opposition, the Tribunal ordered the deferral of the application to avoid adjudicative duplication and the risk of inconsistent findings of fact.

Grant v. Sturteco Canada, 2011 HRTO 1111

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 8, 2011

Human rights application deferred pending resolution of ongoing union grievance on the same issues.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of disability, claiming he was not recalled for work because of a prior workplace injury.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer the application because the applicant had an ongoing union grievance dealing with the same subject matter.

As no submissions were received from the parties opposing deferral, the Tribunal deferred the application pending the conclusion of the grievance process.

Joseph Leblanc v. Xstrata Nickel, 2011 HRTO 1109

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 7, 2011

Tribunal declined to dismiss human rights application at preliminary stage as delay was not plain and obvious.

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

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

After reviewing the applicant's submissions, the Tribunal found it was not plain and obvious that the application was out of time, as the applicant alleged her employment was terminated within the one-year period.

The Tribunal directed that the application be served on the respondent.

Sohiala Khaksar v. International Clothiers, 2011 HRTO 1104

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 7, 2011

Tribunal declines to dismiss racial profiling application at preliminary stage, finding jurisdiction not plainly absent.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of race and age after mall security ticketed him for panhandling and loitering.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss, questioning its jurisdiction.

After reviewing the applicant's submissions alleging differential treatment compared to Caucasian patrons, the Tribunal found it was not plain and obvious that the application fell outside its jurisdiction.

The Tribunal directed that the application be processed and delivered to the respondents.

Ladd v. Securicor Services, 2011 HRTO 1103

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 6, 2011

Preliminary request to dismiss human rights application against WSIB for lack of jurisdiction denied.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination by the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) in the provision of labour market re-entry services, based on ancestry, ethnic origin, creed, disability, and age.

The WSIB requested that the application be dismissed on a preliminary basis, arguing that language is not a protected ground, the WSIB's adjudicative decisions are outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction, and there was no prima facie case.

The Tribunal denied the request to dismiss, finding that the intersection of language with protected grounds required a factual assessment, the challenged WSIB functions were not strictly adjudicative, and the allegations were sufficient to establish a prima facie case at the preliminary stage.

Leacock v. Workplace Safety and Insurance Board, 2011 HRTO 1065

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 6, 2011

Applicant ordered to disclose unredacted LTD settlement document as figures are relevant to damages.

The respondent employer in a human rights application alleging disability discrimination brought a request for an order during proceedings.

The respondent sought disclosure of an unredacted settlement document between the applicant and his long-term disability insurer, arguing the breakdown of settlement figures was necessary to prevent double recovery for loss of income.

The Tribunal granted the request, ordering the applicant to produce the unredacted document, as the settlement figures were arguably relevant to the issue of damages and for the purposes of mediation.

Bindra v. Ontario Infrastructure Projects Corporation, 2011 HRTO 1089

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 3, 2011

Request to amend human rights application to add the ground of disability granted.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging age discrimination regarding a collective agreement provision on disability benefits.

She subsequently requested an order to amend her application to add the ground of disability, arguing the respondents put disability into issue in their responses.

The Tribunal granted the request, noting the amendment was sought promptly, no hearing had been scheduled, the respondents identified no prejudice, and the new ground related to the existing factual narrative.

Ewing v. Thunder Bay Police Services Board, 2011 HRTO 1066

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 2, 2011

Tribunal grants applicant's request to amend application to add corporate respondent and change discrimination grounds.

The applicant filed a Request for Order During Proceedings to amend her human rights application.

She sought to remove the General Manager as a respondent, add her former employer as the organizational respondent, change the grounds of discrimination from sex and reprisal to disability, and amend her remedial claims.

The Tribunal granted the request, finding that the employer was aware of the application from the outset, the new ground of disability was based on the original narrative, and there was no significant prejudice to the employer.

Helene Loney v. Combusco Enterprises Ltd. o/a Ideal Combustion, 2011 HRTO 1050

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 2, 2011

Applicant ordered to provide contact information and comply with disclosure rules or face abandonment of applications.

The applicant filed two human rights applications alleging discrimination in employment.

The applicant's counsel withdrew from the record, citing an inability to locate or obtain instructions from the applicant.

The applicant also failed to comply with document disclosure rules.

The Tribunal ordered the applicant to provide current contact information and comply with disclosure rules within 10 days, failing which the applications would be deemed abandoned.

Carrillo v. Amore Food Group, 2011 HRTO 1056

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 31, 2011

Human rights application deferred pending the conclusion of a concurrent grievance arbitration.

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

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer because the facts of the application were part of an ongoing grievance under a collective agreement.

The respondent supported deferral, noting the grievance was scheduled for arbitration.

The Tribunal deferred the application pending the conclusion of the grievance process, affirming that grievance arbitrators have the jurisdiction and responsibility to enforce human rights obligations.

Walton v. Fisher and Ludlow, 2011 HRTO 1038

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 30, 2011

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to jurisdictional notice.

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

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss, noting that the respondent appeared to be a federally regulated business, and directed the applicant to provide written submissions on the jurisdictional issue.

The applicant failed to respond to the Notice.

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

Done Adiizua v. Kriska Transportation Group, 2011 HRTO 1028

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 30, 2011

Human rights application permitted to proceed after applicant provided supplementary information clarifying allegations against respondents.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging age discrimination in employment against 12 respondents.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Incomplete Application and a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because the application failed to identify specific acts of discrimination by the named individuals.

The applicant filed supplementary information narrowing the respondents to five individuals and two organizations, and specifying the reasons for their inclusion.

The Tribunal found the supplementary information sufficient to process the application and directed that it be delivered to the respondents.

Fallon v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2011 HRTO 1029

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 27, 2011

Human rights application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction due to concurrent civil proceeding.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and harassment by the police.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because the applicant had also commenced a civil proceeding based on the same facts and seeking similar remedies, including Charter damages.

The Tribunal found that section 34(11) of the Human Rights Code barred the application from proceeding due to the concurrent civil suit.

The application was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Bhikram v. Toronto City Police Force and Sheila Richardson, 2011 HRTO 1014

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 27, 2011

Human rights application dismissed as out of time; medical evidence insufficient to prove good faith delay.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability and age, more than one year after the last alleged incident.

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

The applicant argued the delay was in good faith due to post-traumatic stress and severe depression, submitting medical reports from 2001-2005.

The Tribunal found the medical evidence insufficient to prove the applicant was incapable of pursuing his rights in a timely manner, especially given his concurrent pursuit of a WSIB claim.

The application was dismissed as out of time.

Lavoie v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2011 HRTO 1018

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 27, 2011

Request for early document production denied as premature under Tribunal rules.

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

The applicant subsequently filed a Request for Order During Proceedings seeking the production of various documents relied upon by the respondent in her Response.

The Tribunal denied the request as premature, noting that under Rule 16 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure, the obligation to disclose documents is not triggered until 21 days after a Confirmation of Hearing is sent.

As no Confirmation of Hearing had been issued and no special circumstances existed, early disclosure was not justified.

Mathew Wozenilek v. Liz Sandals, 2011 HRTO 1015

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 27, 2011

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

The applicant filed a human rights application that appeared to be outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction due to delay.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss requiring written submissions on the issue.

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

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

Victoria Davis v. Sarnia Golf and Curling Club Ltd., 2011 HRTO 1007

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 27, 2011

Human rights application deferred pending resolution of concurrent union grievances raising the same issues.

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

The respondents requested that the Tribunal defer the application because the allegations regarding accommodation and wrongful dismissal were also the subject of two ongoing union grievances.

The Tribunal noted that it generally defers applications where there is an ongoing grievance based on the same facts and issues, to avoid concurrent proceedings and inconsistent decisions.

Finding that the grievances were currently being mediated, the Tribunal ordered the deferral of the application pending their resolution.

McGee v. Toronto (City), 2011 HRTO 1013

D. Alan Whyte

6 cases1998–2015

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 27, 2011

Human rights application dismissed as untimely; medical evidence insufficient to prove good faith delay.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability five days after the one-year limitation period expired.

The applicant argued the delay was incurred in good faith due to a mental health condition that prevented earlier filing.

The Tribunal found the medical evidence insufficient to establish that the disability was so debilitating as to prevent the applicant from pursuing his rights, noting he was able to pursue employment insurance and attend college during the same period.

The application was dismissed as untimely.

Low v. Hanley Corporation (Tim Hortons), 2011 HRTO 1012

Ena Chadha

HRTO0 cases2008–2014

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 19, 2011

Tribunal directs respondent to file Response to workplace reprisal application.

The applicant filed an application alleging workplace reprisal after participating in an internal human rights proceeding and complaining about harassment.

The Tribunal previously confirmed its jurisdiction and directed the applicant to specify the Code grounds related to her allegations.

After reviewing the applicant's written submissions, the Tribunal found that the respondent had sufficient information to file a Response and directed it to do so by June 13, 2011.

Borba v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2011 HRTO 963

Page 26 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 26 of 44 (867 cases)