Ena Chadha

Human rights application dismissed as barred by s. 34(11) due to ongoing civil proceeding.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal regarding his eviction from a storage unit.

He had previously commenced a small claims court action against the respondents based on the identical facts and seeking similar remedies.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding it was barred by section 34(11) of the Human Rights Code, which precludes duplicate proceedings where a civil action has been commenced seeking remedies for the same alleged infringement.

Herman v. Canadian Mini-Warehouse Properties, 2013 HRTO 1018

Jennifer Richards

82 cases2007–2019

Ena Chadha

Tribunal removes individual respondent and denies applicant's late request to add new allegations.

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

Following a summary hearing, only one age-related allegation remained.

The respondents requested the removal of the individual respondent, as there were no live allegations against him.

The applicant requested to amend her application to add new allegations and remedies.

The Tribunal granted the respondents' request to remove the individual respondent.

The Tribunal denied the applicant's request to add new allegations, finding it would be prejudicial given the late stage of the proceedings, but deferred the request to add new remedies to the hearing on the merits.

Johnson v. Ontario (Government Services), 2013 HRTO 1013

Kevin D. Sherkin

148 cases2000–2026

Ena Chadha

Tribunal dismisses application against unidentified manager but declines to dismiss against franchisor at preliminary stage.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in services after being refused seating at a franchise restaurant.

In this interim decision, the Tribunal dismissed the application against the unidentified manager/owner due to lack of contact information.

The Tribunal declined to dismiss the application against the franchisor at a preliminary stage, directing that franchisor liability be determined at the hearing.

The Tribunal also noted the franchisee's failure to respond and directed the matter to proceed to a one-day hearing.

Virgin Elgin v. Bagel World, 2013 HRTO 996

Naomi Calla

32 cases2009–2017

Michele Wright

30 cases2008–2021

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 4, 2013

Request for order to identify security employer resolved without order after voluntary disclosure.

The applicant filed a Request for an Order during Proceedings seeking the identity of the security company used at BMO Field, intending to add them as a respondent to his human rights application alleging racial discrimination.

The Board of Governors of Exhibition Place voluntarily confirmed it is the employer of the security guards.

The Tribunal found no order was necessary as the requested information had been provided, and directed the applicant to promptly take steps if he intends to add a respondent.

Adore v. Toronto Police Service Board, 2013 HRTO 990

Michelle A. Alton

Ena Chadha

In Private Practice7 cases2013–2022

Application reactivated after abeyance; request for Tribunal-ordered inquiry into termination denied.

The applicant requested to reactivate his human rights application after it was held in abeyance pending the outcome of his first application.

The Tribunal granted the reactivation as the final decision in the first application had been issued.

The applicant also requested a Tribunal-ordered inquiry to investigate his termination and disprove the respondent's allegations of theft.

The Tribunal denied this request, stating that an inquiry is not a mechanism for a party to bolster its position regarding the other party's evidence.

Ibrahim v. Hilton Toronto, 2013 HRTO 981

Samantha Lamb

Russell MacCrimmon

In Private Practice11 cases2010–2022

David Patacairk

Practising Law - Employed51 cases2009–2017

Ena Chadha

Union granted intervenor status; jurisdictional challenge regarding federally regulated workplace deferred to teleconference hearing.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability against the City of Ottawa, relating to his placement on a Priority Placement Program after being employed as a bus driver with OC Transpo.

The respondent requested the application be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, arguing OC Transpo is a federally-regulated enterprise.

The applicant's union requested intervenor status.

The Tribunal granted the union intervenor status and directed that a teleconference hearing be scheduled to hear oral submissions on the preliminary issues of jurisdiction and document production.

Jamal Hassan v. City of Ottawa, 2013 HRTO 963

Roger Mills

22 cases1995–2017

Ena Chadha

In Private Practice39 cases2012–2026

Request for early production of investigative report denied as premature absent exceptional circumstances.

The applicant requested early disclosure and production of an Investigative Report related to her workplace complaint, arguing it was relevant to her allegations of reprisal.

The respondents opposed the request.

The Tribunal denied the request as premature, noting that early production is only ordered in exceptional circumstances, which the applicant failed to demonstrate.

Nash v. Ottawa-Carleton District School Board, 2013 HRTO 960

Zohar R. Levy

Ena Chadha

Practising Law - Employed11 cases2010–2016

Applicant directed to provide consent or submissions regarding respondent's use of her personal health information.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination by the respondent doctor's office.

Prior to filing a response, the respondent sought confirmation that it could rely on the applicant's personal health information under the Personal Health Information Protection Act (PHIPA) without consent.

The Tribunal directed the applicant to either provide written consent or file submissions opposing the respondent's use and disclosure of her personal health information.

Vinayagamoorthie v. Dr. Jeannette Salib’s Doctor’s Office, 2013 HRTO 938

Victoria Shen

Deborah Howden

In Private Practice6 cases2013–2024

Ena Chadha

Tribunal grants requests to add affected party and amend application to clarify remedies sought.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging failure to accommodate her disability-related need for accessible parking.

She brought requests for an order during proceedings to provide notice to an adjacent condominium corporation as an affected party, to correct the legal name of the respondent condominium, and to amend her application to add non-monetary and public interest remedies.

The Tribunal granted the requests, noting the adjacent condominium shared the disputed parking area and the amendments provided greater clarity without prejudicing the respondents.

Selinger v. Icon Property Management Ltd., 2013 HRTO 932

Ena Chadha

In Private Practice36 cases2009–2026

Respondent given 14 days to file a Response to an Application for Contravention of Settlement.

The applicant filed an Application for Contravention of Settlement under section 45.9 of the Human Rights Code.

The respondent failed to file a Response by the required deadline.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision directing the respondent to file a Response within 14 days, failing which the Tribunal may proceed without further notice and deem the respondent to have accepted the allegations.

Solomon Kebede v. Aboutown Transportation Limited, 2013 HRTO 930

David Rosenfeld

Ena Chadha

Request to reactivate deferred application denied as related WSIAT proceedings were not yet completed.

The applicant requested to reactivate a human rights application that had been deferred pending the conclusion of a related claim under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act.

The respondent opposed the reactivation because the applicant's appeal before the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeal Tribunal was still ongoing.

The Tribunal denied the request to reactivate, finding that the other process had not yet been completed as required by the initial deferral decision.

Tarjinderjit Ghumaan v. ASCO Manufacturing Limited and Jay Friedman, 2013 HRTO 929

Ena Chadha

Tribunal declines to add corporate franchisor as respondent alongside franchisee in discrimination application.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in services on the basis of race and colour at a McDonald's restaurant.

The Tribunal previously issued an interim decision substituting the franchisee, Bartlett Family Restaurants Inc., for the corporate franchisor as the respondent.

The applicant subsequently requested that the franchisor remain as a respondent.

The Tribunal found no reasonable basis to conclude the corporate franchisor had a nexus to the alleged conduct of the franchisee's employees and declined to vary its previous order.

Wedemire v. Bartlett Family Restaurants Inc., 2013 HRTO 924

Ena Chadha

Human rights application dismissed as out of time; pursuing other legal avenues does not justify delay.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of marital status.

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, and raised other jurisdictional concerns.

The applicant argued the delay was justified because he was pursuing other legal avenues and experiencing ongoing hardship.

The Tribunal found that pursuing other legal avenues does not justify delay and that continuing effects of alleged discrimination do not extend the limitation period.

The application was dismissed as out of time.

Gazo v. I.B.E.U. Local 353, 2013 HRTO 916

Monica Goyal

Michelle A. Alton

Jorge Hurtado

36 cases2009–2026

Ena Chadha

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent duty of fair representation complaint before OLRB.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal in employment on the basis of place of origin, ethnic origin, and age.

The applicant also had an outstanding duty of fair representation complaint before the Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB) involving similar facts and allegations against the union.

The Tribunal considered whether to defer the application pending the OLRB proceeding.

Given the advanced stage of the OLRB matter, the factual similarity, and the applicant's request to add the union as a respondent, the Tribunal ordered the deferral of the application to avoid concurrent proceedings and inconsistent decisions.

Andrew Jayashankar v. Hilton Toronto Hotel and Kiran Panikar, 2013 HRTO 910

Luke J. Saites

10 cases2012–2017

Karimjee Greene

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 21, 2013

Reconsideration granted where applicant missed Tribunal correspondence due to malfunctioning apartment buzzer.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed her human rights application as abandoned.

The applicant explained that she did not receive the Tribunal's correspondence because her housing unit's buzzer was malfunctioning, an issue she alleged was part of the discrimination she faced.

The Tribunal granted the reconsideration request, finding that the applicant did not receive notice through no fault of her own and did not intend to abandon the application.

The Tribunal also ordered a summary hearing to determine whether the application should be dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success or because it was appropriately dealt with in eviction proceedings before the Superior Court.

Feliz v. Margaret Laurence Housing Co-operative, 2013 HRTO 873

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 16, 2013

Request for interim remedy and expedited proceeding to halt eviction dismissed for lack of urgency.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in housing and requested an interim remedy to resolve the issues prior to an upcoming eviction proceeding.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding that the applicant failed to establish that the balance of harm favoured granting the interim remedy or that the remedy was necessary to ensure a complete and effective remedy at the end of the hearing.

The Tribunal also declined to expedite the application, as the circumstances were not truly urgent.

Scott v. Otter Creek Co-operative Homes Inc., 2013 HRTO 837

Donna Polgar

4 cases2012–2014

Ena Chadha

Tribunal substitutes franchisee for franchisor as the proper respondent in a human rights application.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination on the basis of race and colour against McDonald's Restaurants of Canada Ltd. The respondent requested that the franchisee, Bartlett Family Restaurants Inc., be substituted as the proper respondent.

Given the respondent's consent and the applicant's failure to file submissions on the issue, the Tribunal removed the franchisor and substituted the franchisee as the respondent.

Wedemire v. Bartlett Family Restaurants Inc., 2013 HRTO 810

Mandy Wojcik

36 cases2009–2023

Grant Bowers

34 cases1995–2014

Ena Chadha

In Private Practice16 cases1993–2016

Human rights application deferred on consent pending completion of Ontario College of Teachers discipline proceedings.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of disability against a school board, a teacher, and a teachers' union.

The applicant requested that the Tribunal defer the application pending the completion of a discipline proceeding before the Ontario College of Teachers.

The respondents consented to the deferral.

The Tribunal ordered the application deferred pending the conclusion of the College proceedings.

C.B. v. Toronto District School Board, 2013 HRTO 805

Lorenzo Lisi

Daniel R. McDonald

17 cases2009–2019

Ena Chadha

Employment and Labour Law

Reconsideration request denied as applicant failed to provide new evidence or show jurisprudential conflict.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of an Interim Decision that dismissed parts of her human rights application against her employer and co-workers due to delay and having no reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal found that the applicant was attempting to re-litigate issues already decided and failed to provide new evidence or demonstrate that the Interim Decision conflicted with established jurisprudence.

The request for reconsideration was denied.

Sharma v. Securitas Canada Ltd., 2013 HRTO 796

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

Human Rights

Administrative Law

Other Tribunals

Landlord and Tenant

Workplace Safety and Insurance Law

Bankruptcy and Insolvency Law

Workers' Compensation

Corporate/Commercial 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

Peter Brauti

In Private Practice56 cases2000–2026

Elme Schmid

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 10, 2013

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent Law Society investigation into identical sexual harassment allegations.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging sexual harassment and a poisoned work environment during her employment at the respondents' law firm.

The Tribunal found that proceeding concurrently would risk unnecessary duplication and inconsistent findings, and ordered the application deferred pending the conclusion of the LSUC process.

Ormesher v. Schwarz Law LLP, 2013 HRTO 1035

Ena Chadha

Human rights application dismissed as barred by s. 34(11) due to ongoing civil proceeding.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal regarding his eviction from a storage unit.

He had previously commenced a small claims court action against the respondents based on the identical facts and seeking similar remedies.

Herman v. Canadian Mini-Warehouse Properties, 2013 HRTO 1018

Jennifer Richards

82 cases2007–2019

Ena Chadha

Tribunal removes individual respondent and denies applicant's late request to add new allegations.

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

Following a summary hearing, only one age-related allegation remained.

The respondents requested the removal of the individual respondent, as there were no live allegations against him.

The applicant requested to amend her application to add new allegations and remedies.

The Tribunal granted the respondents' request to remove the individual respondent.

Johnson v. Ontario (Government Services), 2013 HRTO 1013

Kevin D. Sherkin

148 cases2000–2026

Ena Chadha

Tribunal dismisses application against unidentified manager but declines to dismiss against franchisor at preliminary stage.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in services after being refused seating at a franchise restaurant.

In this interim decision, the Tribunal dismissed the application against the unidentified manager/owner due to lack of contact information.

The Tribunal declined to dismiss the application against the franchisor at a preliminary stage, directing that franchisor liability be determined at the hearing.

The Tribunal also noted the franchisee's failure to respond and directed the matter to proceed to a one-day hearing.

Virgin Elgin v. Bagel World, 2013 HRTO 996

Naomi Calla

32 cases2009–2017

Michele Wright

30 cases2008–2021

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 4, 2013

Request for order to identify security employer resolved without order after voluntary disclosure.

The Board of Governors of Exhibition Place voluntarily confirmed it is the employer of the security guards.

The Tribunal found no order was necessary as the requested information had been provided, and directed the applicant to promptly take steps if he intends to add a respondent.

Adore v. Toronto Police Service Board, 2013 HRTO 990

Michelle A. Alton

Ena Chadha

In Private Practice7 cases2013–2022

Application reactivated after abeyance; request for Tribunal-ordered inquiry into termination denied.

The applicant requested to reactivate his human rights application after it was held in abeyance pending the outcome of his first application.

The Tribunal granted the reactivation as the final decision in the first application had been issued.

The applicant also requested a Tribunal-ordered inquiry to investigate his termination and disprove the respondent's allegations of theft.

The Tribunal denied this request, stating that an inquiry is not a mechanism for a party to bolster its position regarding the other party's evidence.

Ibrahim v. Hilton Toronto, 2013 HRTO 981

Samantha Lamb

Russell MacCrimmon

In Private Practice11 cases2010–2022

David Patacairk

Practising Law - Employed51 cases2009–2017

Ena Chadha

Union granted intervenor status; jurisdictional challenge regarding federally regulated workplace deferred to teleconference hearing.

The respondent requested the application be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, arguing OC Transpo is a federally-regulated enterprise.

The applicant's union requested intervenor status.

The Tribunal granted the union intervenor status and directed that a teleconference hearing be scheduled to hear oral submissions on the preliminary issues of jurisdiction and document production.

Jamal Hassan v. City of Ottawa, 2013 HRTO 963

Roger Mills

22 cases1995–2017

Ena Chadha

In Private Practice39 cases2012–2026

Request for early production of investigative report denied as premature absent exceptional circumstances.

The applicant requested early disclosure and production of an Investigative Report related to her workplace complaint, arguing it was relevant to her allegations of reprisal.

The respondents opposed the request.

The Tribunal denied the request as premature, noting that early production is only ordered in exceptional circumstances, which the applicant failed to demonstrate.

Nash v. Ottawa-Carleton District School Board, 2013 HRTO 960

Zohar R. Levy

Ena Chadha

Practising Law - Employed11 cases2010–2016

Applicant directed to provide consent or submissions regarding respondent's use of her personal health information.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination by the respondent doctor's office.

The Tribunal directed the applicant to either provide written consent or file submissions opposing the respondent's use and disclosure of her personal health information.

Vinayagamoorthie v. Dr. Jeannette Salib’s Doctor’s Office, 2013 HRTO 938

Victoria Shen

Deborah Howden

In Private Practice6 cases2013–2024

Ena Chadha

Tribunal grants requests to add affected party and amend application to clarify remedies sought.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging failure to accommodate her disability-related need for accessible parking.

The Tribunal granted the requests, noting the adjacent condominium shared the disputed parking area and the amendments provided greater clarity without prejudicing the respondents.

Selinger v. Icon Property Management Ltd., 2013 HRTO 932

Ena Chadha

In Private Practice36 cases2009–2026

Respondent given 14 days to file a Response to an Application for Contravention of Settlement.

The applicant filed an Application for Contravention of Settlement under section 45.9 of the Human Rights Code.

The respondent failed to file a Response by the required deadline.

Solomon Kebede v. Aboutown Transportation Limited, 2013 HRTO 930

David Rosenfeld

Ena Chadha

Request to reactivate deferred application denied as related WSIAT proceedings were not yet completed.

The applicant requested to reactivate a human rights application that had been deferred pending the conclusion of a related claim under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act.

The respondent opposed the reactivation because the applicant's appeal before the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeal Tribunal was still ongoing.

The Tribunal denied the request to reactivate, finding that the other process had not yet been completed as required by the initial deferral decision.

Tarjinderjit Ghumaan v. ASCO Manufacturing Limited and Jay Friedman, 2013 HRTO 929

Ena Chadha

Tribunal declines to add corporate franchisor as respondent alongside franchisee in discrimination application.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in services on the basis of race and colour at a McDonald's restaurant.

The Tribunal previously issued an interim decision substituting the franchisee, Bartlett Family Restaurants Inc., for the corporate franchisor as the respondent.

The applicant subsequently requested that the franchisor remain as a respondent.

The Tribunal found no reasonable basis to conclude the corporate franchisor had a nexus to the alleged conduct of the franchisee's employees and declined to vary its previous order.

Wedemire v. Bartlett Family Restaurants Inc., 2013 HRTO 924

Ena Chadha

Human rights application dismissed as out of time; pursuing other legal avenues does not justify delay.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of marital status.

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, and raised other jurisdictional concerns.

The applicant argued the delay was justified because he was pursuing other legal avenues and experiencing ongoing hardship.

The Tribunal found that pursuing other legal avenues does not justify delay and that continuing effects of alleged discrimination do not extend the limitation period.

The application was dismissed as out of time.

Gazo v. I.B.E.U. Local 353, 2013 HRTO 916

Monica Goyal

Michelle A. Alton

Jorge Hurtado

36 cases2009–2026

Ena Chadha

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent duty of fair representation complaint before OLRB.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal in employment on the basis of place of origin, ethnic origin, and age.

The applicant also had an outstanding duty of fair representation complaint before the Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB) involving similar facts and allegations against the union.

The Tribunal considered whether to defer the application pending the OLRB proceeding.

Andrew Jayashankar v. Hilton Toronto Hotel and Kiran Panikar, 2013 HRTO 910

Luke J. Saites

10 cases2012–2017

Karimjee Greene

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 21, 2013

Reconsideration granted where applicant missed Tribunal correspondence due to malfunctioning apartment buzzer.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed her human rights application as abandoned.

The applicant explained that she did not receive the Tribunal's correspondence because her housing unit's buzzer was malfunctioning, an issue she alleged was part of the discrimination she faced.

The Tribunal granted the reconsideration request, finding that the applicant did not receive notice through no fault of her own and did not intend to abandon the application.

Feliz v. Margaret Laurence Housing Co-operative, 2013 HRTO 873

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 16, 2013

Request for interim remedy and expedited proceeding to halt eviction dismissed for lack of urgency.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in housing and requested an interim remedy to resolve the issues prior to an upcoming eviction proceeding.

The Tribunal also declined to expedite the application, as the circumstances were not truly urgent.

Scott v. Otter Creek Co-operative Homes Inc., 2013 HRTO 837

Donna Polgar

4 cases2012–2014

Ena Chadha

Tribunal substitutes franchisee for franchisor as the proper respondent in a human rights application.

Given the respondent's consent and the applicant's failure to file submissions on the issue, the Tribunal removed the franchisor and substituted the franchisee as the respondent.

Wedemire v. Bartlett Family Restaurants Inc., 2013 HRTO 810

Mandy Wojcik

36 cases2009–2023

Grant Bowers

34 cases1995–2014

Ena Chadha

In Private Practice16 cases1993–2016

Human rights application deferred on consent pending completion of Ontario College of Teachers discipline proceedings.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of disability against a school board, a teacher, and a teachers' union.

The applicant requested that the Tribunal defer the application pending the completion of a discipline proceeding before the Ontario College of Teachers.

The respondents consented to the deferral.

The Tribunal ordered the application deferred pending the conclusion of the College proceedings.

C.B. v. Toronto District School Board, 2013 HRTO 805

Lorenzo Lisi

Daniel R. McDonald

17 cases2009–2019

Ena Chadha