Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 13, 2013

Reconsideration denied; applicant's ignorance of human rights process did not excuse seven-year delay in filing.

The applicant sought reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his human rights application as abandoned after he failed to respond to a Notice of Intent to Dismiss.

The original application, alleging failure to accommodate a heart attack and subsequent termination, was filed approximately seven years after the events.

The Tribunal denied the reconsideration request, finding no new determinative facts, no conflict with established jurisprudence, and no compelling circumstances to outweigh the public interest in the finality of decisions.

The applicant's ignorance of the human rights process did not excuse the significant delay.

David Molnar v. Sinclair Computer Forms, 2013 HRTO 794

Ena Chadha

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

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal based on sex and family status, claiming she was constructively dismissed after taking pregnancy leave.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer the application because the applicant had previously filed an Employment Standards Act claim with the Ministry of Labour raising similar facts and issues.

The applicant agreed to the deferral, and the respondent did not object.

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

Allagas v. Plato Adult Education Centre, 2013 HRTO 775

Ena Chadha

Practising Law - Employed19 cases2008–2013

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of overlapping Employment Standards Act claim.

The respondent requested to defer the applicant's human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of place of origin and citizenship.

The request was based on the fact that the applicant had previously filed a claim with the Ministry of Labour under the Employment Standards Act (ESA) regarding unpaid wages and termination.

The Tribunal found that the ESA claim and the human rights application overlapped factually, particularly regarding the applicant's employment status and the circumstances of his termination.

The Tribunal ordered the deferral of the application pending the conclusion of the ESA process to avoid concurrent proceedings and inconsistent decisions.

Fernandes v. Smart Corporation, 2013 HRTO 774

Request to amend human rights application to add broad new allegations denied; provincial respondents added.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination based on disability regarding the respondent's refusal to cover the costs of medical marijuana.

The applicant subsequently filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings to amend the application by adding numerous new allegations and several new respondents.

The Tribunal denied the request to add the new allegations, finding them too broad and disconnected from the original issue.

The Tribunal also denied the request to add Bruce County and Simcoe County as respondents, but permitted the addition of the Province of Ontario and related ministries as they appeared involved in the funding and eligibility of benefits coverage.

The request for interim relief was denied.

Kueber v. The Corporation of the County of Grey, 2013 HRTO 762

Lucy Siraco

35 cases2000–2016

Farah Malik

Ena Chadha

In Private Practice15 cases1983–2017

Personal respondent removed from human rights application on consent after employer accepted vicarious liability.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of disability and reprisal against her employer and a personal respondent.

The respondents requested the removal of the personal respondent, accepting vicarious liability for her actions.

The applicant consented to the removal.

The Tribunal ordered the removal of the personal respondent and directed the parties to schedule mediation.

Dewdney v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2013 HRTO 745

Peter K. Hrastovec

2 cases1990–2013

Nancy Jummu-Taylor

1 case2013–2013

David Deluzio

Ena Chadha

In Private Practice16 cases2007–2021

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent workplace grievance regarding sexual harassment.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging sexual harassment in the workplace.

A concurrent grievance was also filed regarding the employer's handling of the complaint.

The applicant's union requested intervenor status, which was granted.

The Tribunal deferred the human rights application pending the conclusion of the grievance process, noting the overlap in issues and the established practice of deferring to concurrent grievance proceedings.

Scullion v. Windsor Casino Limited, 2013 HRTO 743

Raquel Chisholm

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 2, 2013

Human rights application deferred pending resolution of concurrent workplace grievances.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of race, alongside two workplace grievances alleging suspension without just cause and harassment.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer the application pending the resolution of the concurrent grievance process.

The respondent supported deferral, while the applicant did not file submissions.

The Tribunal deferred the application to avoid concurrent proceedings, noting that grievance arbitrators have the jurisdiction to enforce human rights obligations.

Cao v. The Ottawa Hospital, 2013 HRTO 725

John Westdal

10 cases2005–2017

Daryn M. Jeffries

In Private Practice10 cases1996–2021

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 1, 2013

Individual respondents removed from human rights applications and the two applications consolidated.

The respondents requested the removal of individual respondents from two human rights applications alleging employment discrimination based on disability.

The Tribunal granted the request, finding that the individual respondents acted within the scope of their employment and there was no compelling reason to keep them as parties.

The Tribunal also ordered the consolidation of the two applications, noting common parties, overlapping facts, and the public interest in avoiding a multiplicity of proceedings.

Muir v. Humber River Regional Hospital, 2013 HRTO 724

Grant Bowers

34 cases1995–2014

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 29, 2013

Tribunal orders school board to disclose individual respondent's address for service despite privacy legislation concerns.

The applicant filed a human rights application against a school board, a teachers' federation, and an individual teacher.

The Tribunal directed the organizational respondents to provide the individual respondent's last known address for service.

The respondents questioned the Tribunal's authority to order disclosure, citing potential conflicts with the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (MFIPPA).

The Tribunal held that it has the authority under the Statutory Powers Procedure Act and the Human Rights Code to order the disclosure of information, and ordered the respondents to provide the address.

C.B. v. Toronto District School Board, 2013 HRTO 706

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 26, 2013

Deferred human rights application reactivated following completion of WSIB proceedings.

The applicant requested the reactivation of his human rights application, which had been deferred pending the completion of WSIB proceedings.

The applicant provided a WSIB Appeals Resolution Officer Decision denying his appeal and confirmed he would not appeal further.

The respondent did not file submissions.

The Tribunal granted the request and reactivated the application.

Michael Tranchemontagne v. C.J. Morris Investments Ltd. o/a Sudbury Hyundai, 2013 HRTO 709

Paul O’Ryan

Practising Law - Employed24 cases2010–2018

Dan Shields

10 cases2011–2020

Ena Chadha

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent grievance arbitration regarding the same issues.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal regarding his employment termination.

The respondent and the applicant's union requested that the application be deferred because a grievance arbitration regarding the same facts and issues was already underway.

The Tribunal deferred the application pending the conclusion of the arbitration process, consistent with its general practice of avoiding concurrent legal proceedings.

Edwards v. Carillion Services, 2013 HRTO 704

Allison Taylor

28 cases2001–2026

Ena Chadha

Practising Law - Employed7 cases2009–2015

Tribunal lacks jurisdiction over human rights allegations against opposing counsel acting in their professional capacity.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment and harassment by the employer's lawyer, who sent a demand letter regarding alleged fraud.

The lawyer, named as an individual respondent, filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings to be removed from the application.

The Tribunal held that it lacks jurisdiction over the conduct of a lawyer representing another party in a legal proceeding and ordered the lawyer removed as a respondent.

McMillan v. Winners Merchants International LP, 2013 HRTO 701

Kevin Inwood

Ena Chadha

In Private Practice3 cases2013–2017

Applicant's request to suspend hearing and extend disclosure deadline due to marital separation denied.

The applicant in a human rights proceeding sought a third extension of time to file his arguably relevant disclosure materials and requested that the hearing be suspended.

He claimed he could not access his documents because they were in his matrimonial home, which he had left due to a marital separation.

The respondents opposed the request, noting the age of the application and the applicant's failure to seek alternative means of obtaining the documents.

The Tribunal denied the applicant's requests, finding he had not provided supporting documentation or established exceptional circumstances to justify an adjournment.

The applicant was ordered to provide his disclosure within 21 days or face potential dismissal of the application for abandonment.

Chad McLeod v. Vale Inco Ltd. and Claire Parkinson, 2013 HRTO 698

Martin Zarnett

Ena Chadha

Not Practising Law5 cases2007–2013

Request to reactivate deferred human rights application denied pending appeal of related LTB decision.

The applicant requested to reactivate her human rights application, which had been deferred pending the completion of a related Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB) proceeding.

Although the LTB had issued a final order, the respondent appealed that order to the Divisional Court.

The Tribunal denied the request to reactivate, finding that the LTB issues had not been completely resolved due to the pending appeal, and extended the deferral until the conclusion of the appeal process.

Tsoref v. Frastell Property Management Inc., 2013 HRTO 697

Zoe King

Jeff Andrew

14 cases1993–2013

Ena Chadha

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent union grievance process; union granted intervenor status.

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

The respondent requested that the application be deferred pending the completion of the applicant's concurrent union grievances.

The applicant's union also requested intervenor status.

The Tribunal granted the union intervenor status, noting the established practice of allowing bargaining agents to intervene in employment discrimination cases.

The Tribunal also deferred the application, finding that the issues raised in the four active grievances overlapped with the concerns alleged in the human rights application.

Emy Bonnici v. Loblaws Inc., 2013 HRTO 689

Carmine Scalzi

2 cases2013–2015

Ena Chadha

Practising Law - Employed3 cases2003–2013

Human rights application deferred pending the conclusion of a related WSIAT appeal on the same facts.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, claiming the respondent failed to accommodate him and forced his resignation.

The respondent requested that the application be deferred pending the outcome of the applicant's related appeal before the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal (WSIAT).

The Tribunal found that the WSIB/WSIAT proceedings dealt with the same factual issues, including the nature of the disability, ability to work, and accommodation.

To avoid concurrent proceedings and inconsistent decisions, the Tribunal ordered the deferral of the human rights application until the conclusion of the WSIAT appeal.

Muhammad Rizwan v. Cosmetica Laboratories Inc., 2013 HRTO 688

Susan Luft

Roger R. Mills

Not Practising Law4 cases2003–2013

Ena Chadha

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent workplace grievance arbitration regarding accommodation.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, specifically that the respondent school board failed to accommodate her need for a modified schedule.

The respondent and the affected party union requested that the application be deferred because a workplace grievance regarding the same facts and human rights issues was already underway.

The Tribunal found that the grievance process pre-dated the application and was actively addressing the accommodation issues.

Applying its regular approach to concurrent proceedings, the Tribunal deferred the application pending the conclusion of the grievance arbitration process.

Janette Blais v. Ottawa Carlton District School Board, 2013 HRTO 678

Ena Chadha

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent Employment Standards Act claim regarding the same termination.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, claiming she was pressured to resign after sustaining injuries in a car accident.

The respondent requested that the application be deferred because the applicant had previously filed a claim with the Ministry of Labour under the Employment Standards Act (ESA) regarding the same termination.

The Tribunal found that the ESA claim dealt with the same facts and overlapping remedies, and ordered the application deferred pending the conclusion of the ESA process.

Sarbijit Kaur v. Barry J. Stafford Enterprises Inc., 2013 HRTO 676

Steve Lavender

23 cases2009–2026

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 22, 2013

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent union grievance process.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, claiming he was terminated because of his disability.

The respondent filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings seeking to defer the application pending the conclusion of an ongoing union grievance dealing with the same facts and issues.

The Tribunal found that a concurrent grievance process was well underway and deferred the application pending the conclusion of the grievance/arbitration process.

Powell v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2013 HRTO 670

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 18, 2013

Tribunal declines to dismiss human rights application for delay at preliminary stage.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because the application appeared to be filed outside the one-year limitation period.

The applicant submitted that the date on the application was an error and referred to a workplace injury, not the last discriminatory event.

The Tribunal found it was not plain and obvious that the application was out of time and directed that the application continue to be processed.

Abrego v. St. Joseph’s Health Care, Parkwood Site, 2013 HRTO 654

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

Employment and Labour Law

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

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 13, 2013

Reconsideration denied; applicant's ignorance of human rights process did not excuse seven-year delay in filing.

The applicant sought reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed his human rights application as abandoned after he failed to respond to a Notice of Intent to Dismiss.

The original application, alleging failure to accommodate a heart attack and subsequent termination, was filed approximately seven years after the events.

The applicant's ignorance of the human rights process did not excuse the significant delay.

David Molnar v. Sinclair Computer Forms, 2013 HRTO 794

Ena Chadha

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

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal based on sex and family status, claiming she was constructively dismissed after taking pregnancy leave.

The applicant agreed to the deferral, and the respondent did not object.

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

Allagas v. Plato Adult Education Centre, 2013 HRTO 775

Ena Chadha

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of overlapping Employment Standards Act claim.

The respondent requested to defer the applicant's human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of place of origin and citizenship.

The request was based on the fact that the applicant had previously filed a claim with the Ministry of Labour under the Employment Standards Act (ESA) regarding unpaid wages and termination.

The Tribunal found that the ESA claim and the human rights application overlapped factually, particularly regarding the applicant's employment status and the circumstances of his termination.

The Tribunal ordered the deferral of the application pending the conclusion of the ESA process to avoid concurrent proceedings and inconsistent decisions.

Fernandes v. Smart Corporation, 2013 HRTO 774

Zachary Green

7 cases2011–2014

Tammy W. Grove-McClement

4 cases2012–2023

Peter Krysiak

47 cases2012–2026

Andrea M. Dedrick

3 cases2013–2013

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 8, 2013

Request to amend human rights application to add broad new allegations denied; provincial respondents added.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination based on disability regarding the respondent's refusal to cover the costs of medical marijuana.

The applicant subsequently filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings to amend the application by adding numerous new allegations and several new respondents.

The Tribunal denied the request to add the new allegations, finding them too broad and disconnected from the original issue.

The request for interim relief was denied.

Kueber v. The Corporation of the County of Grey, 2013 HRTO 762

Lucy Siraco

35 cases2000–2016

Farah Malik

Practising Law - Employed19 cases2008–2013

Ena Chadha

In Private Practice15 cases1983–2017

Personal respondent removed from human rights application on consent after employer accepted vicarious liability.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of disability and reprisal against her employer and a personal respondent.

The respondents requested the removal of the personal respondent, accepting vicarious liability for her actions.

The applicant consented to the removal.

The Tribunal ordered the removal of the personal respondent and directed the parties to schedule mediation.

Dewdney v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2013 HRTO 745

Peter K. Hrastovec

2 cases1990–2013

Nancy Jummu-Taylor

1 case2013–2013

David Deluzio

Ena Chadha

In Private Practice16 cases2007–2021

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent workplace grievance regarding sexual harassment.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging sexual harassment in the workplace.

A concurrent grievance was also filed regarding the employer's handling of the complaint.

The applicant's union requested intervenor status, which was granted.

Scullion v. Windsor Casino Limited, 2013 HRTO 743

Raquel Chisholm

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 2, 2013

Human rights application deferred pending resolution of concurrent workplace grievances.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of race, alongside two workplace grievances alleging suspension without just cause and harassment.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer the application pending the resolution of the concurrent grievance process.

The respondent supported deferral, while the applicant did not file submissions.

The Tribunal deferred the application to avoid concurrent proceedings, noting that grievance arbitrators have the jurisdiction to enforce human rights obligations.

Cao v. The Ottawa Hospital, 2013 HRTO 725

John Westdal

10 cases2005–2017

Daryn M. Jeffries

In Private Practice10 cases1996–2021

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 1, 2013

Individual respondents removed from human rights applications and the two applications consolidated.

The respondents requested the removal of individual respondents from two human rights applications alleging employment discrimination based on disability.

The Tribunal granted the request, finding that the individual respondents acted within the scope of their employment and there was no compelling reason to keep them as parties.

The Tribunal also ordered the consolidation of the two applications, noting common parties, overlapping facts, and the public interest in avoiding a multiplicity of proceedings.

Muir v. Humber River Regional Hospital, 2013 HRTO 724

Grant Bowers

34 cases1995–2014

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 29, 2013

Tribunal orders school board to disclose individual respondent's address for service despite privacy legislation concerns.

The applicant filed a human rights application against a school board, a teachers' federation, and an individual teacher.

The Tribunal directed the organizational respondents to provide the individual respondent's last known address for service.

The respondents questioned the Tribunal's authority to order disclosure, citing potential conflicts with the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (MFIPPA).

C.B. v. Toronto District School Board, 2013 HRTO 706

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 26, 2013

Deferred human rights application reactivated following completion of WSIB proceedings.

The applicant requested the reactivation of his human rights application, which had been deferred pending the completion of WSIB proceedings.

The applicant provided a WSIB Appeals Resolution Officer Decision denying his appeal and confirmed he would not appeal further.

The respondent did not file submissions.

The Tribunal granted the request and reactivated the application.

Michael Tranchemontagne v. C.J. Morris Investments Ltd. o/a Sudbury Hyundai, 2013 HRTO 709

Paul O’Ryan

Practising Law - Employed24 cases2010–2018

Dan Shields

10 cases2011–2020

Ena Chadha

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent grievance arbitration regarding the same issues.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal regarding his employment termination.

The respondent and the applicant's union requested that the application be deferred because a grievance arbitration regarding the same facts and issues was already underway.

The Tribunal deferred the application pending the conclusion of the arbitration process, consistent with its general practice of avoiding concurrent legal proceedings.

Edwards v. Carillion Services, 2013 HRTO 704

Allison Taylor

28 cases2001–2026

Ena Chadha

Practising Law - Employed7 cases2009–2015

Tribunal lacks jurisdiction over human rights allegations against opposing counsel acting in their professional capacity.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment and harassment by the employer's lawyer, who sent a demand letter regarding alleged fraud.

The lawyer, named as an individual respondent, filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings to be removed from the application.

The Tribunal held that it lacks jurisdiction over the conduct of a lawyer representing another party in a legal proceeding and ordered the lawyer removed as a respondent.

McMillan v. Winners Merchants International LP, 2013 HRTO 701

Kevin Inwood

Ena Chadha

In Private Practice3 cases2013–2017

Applicant's request to suspend hearing and extend disclosure deadline due to marital separation denied.

The applicant in a human rights proceeding sought a third extension of time to file his arguably relevant disclosure materials and requested that the hearing be suspended.

He claimed he could not access his documents because they were in his matrimonial home, which he had left due to a marital separation.

The respondents opposed the request, noting the age of the application and the applicant's failure to seek alternative means of obtaining the documents.

The Tribunal denied the applicant's requests, finding he had not provided supporting documentation or established exceptional circumstances to justify an adjournment.

The applicant was ordered to provide his disclosure within 21 days or face potential dismissal of the application for abandonment.

Chad McLeod v. Vale Inco Ltd. and Claire Parkinson, 2013 HRTO 698

Martin Zarnett

Ena Chadha

Not Practising Law5 cases2007–2013

Request to reactivate deferred human rights application denied pending appeal of related LTB decision.

The applicant requested to reactivate her human rights application, which had been deferred pending the completion of a related Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB) proceeding.

Although the LTB had issued a final order, the respondent appealed that order to the Divisional Court.

Tsoref v. Frastell Property Management Inc., 2013 HRTO 697

Zoe King

Jeff Andrew

14 cases1993–2013

Ena Chadha

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent union grievance process; union granted intervenor status.

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

The respondent requested that the application be deferred pending the completion of the applicant's concurrent union grievances.

The applicant's union also requested intervenor status.

The Tribunal granted the union intervenor status, noting the established practice of allowing bargaining agents to intervene in employment discrimination cases.

The Tribunal also deferred the application, finding that the issues raised in the four active grievances overlapped with the concerns alleged in the human rights application.

Emy Bonnici v. Loblaws Inc., 2013 HRTO 689

Carmine Scalzi

2 cases2013–2015

Ena Chadha

Practising Law - Employed3 cases2003–2013

Human rights application deferred pending the conclusion of a related WSIAT appeal on the same facts.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, claiming the respondent failed to accommodate him and forced his resignation.

The respondent requested that the application be deferred pending the outcome of the applicant's related appeal before the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal (WSIAT).

The Tribunal found that the WSIB/WSIAT proceedings dealt with the same factual issues, including the nature of the disability, ability to work, and accommodation.

To avoid concurrent proceedings and inconsistent decisions, the Tribunal ordered the deferral of the human rights application until the conclusion of the WSIAT appeal.

Muhammad Rizwan v. Cosmetica Laboratories Inc., 2013 HRTO 688

Susan Luft

Roger R. Mills

Not Practising Law4 cases2003–2013

Ena Chadha

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent workplace grievance arbitration regarding accommodation.

The respondent and the affected party union requested that the application be deferred because a workplace grievance regarding the same facts and human rights issues was already underway.

The Tribunal found that the grievance process pre-dated the application and was actively addressing the accommodation issues.

Applying its regular approach to concurrent proceedings, the Tribunal deferred the application pending the conclusion of the grievance arbitration process.

Janette Blais v. Ottawa Carlton District School Board, 2013 HRTO 678

Ena Chadha

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent Employment Standards Act claim regarding the same termination.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, claiming she was pressured to resign after sustaining injuries in a car accident.

The Tribunal found that the ESA claim dealt with the same facts and overlapping remedies, and ordered the application deferred pending the conclusion of the ESA process.

Sarbijit Kaur v. Barry J. Stafford Enterprises Inc., 2013 HRTO 676

Steve Lavender

23 cases2009–2026

Ena Chadha

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 22, 2013

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent union grievance process.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, claiming he was terminated because of his disability.

The respondent filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings seeking to defer the application pending the conclusion of an ongoing union grievance dealing with the same facts and issues.

The Tribunal found that a concurrent grievance process was well underway and deferred the application pending the conclusion of the grievance/arbitration process.

Powell v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2013 HRTO 670

Ena Chadha