Geneviève Debané

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioNov 6, 2015

Human rights application alleging police reprisal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

The applicant filed an Application alleging reprisal in services by the Ottawa Police Service, claiming he was visited by an officer and placed under surveillance following a legal dispute with a former employer.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

The Tribunal dismissed the Application, finding the applicant failed to establish he had asserted his rights under the Human Rights Code and that his link between his former employer and the respondent was pure speculation.

Sikou v. Service de Police de la Ville d’Ottawa, 2015 HRTO 1496

Geneviève Debané

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioNov 4, 2015

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Tribunal directions.

The respondent filed a Request for Summary Hearing.

The applicant failed to file a response.

The Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction warning the applicant that failure to respond could result in the application being dismissed as abandoned.

The applicant did not comply with the direction.

Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the human rights application as abandoned.

Lana Delaney v. Mills Business Group, 2015 HRTO 1485

J. Christopher Russell

In Private Practice4 cases2015–2026

Geneviève Debané

Request to dismiss human rights application denied; WSIB decision on work-relatedness did not address duty to accommodate.

The respondent employer sought to dismiss the human rights application under s. 45.1 of the Human Rights Code, arguing the substance was dealt with by the WSIB.

The WSIB had previously disallowed the applicant's claim for benefits, finding his knee injury was not work-related.

The Tribunal denied the request to dismiss, holding that the Code requires an employer to accommodate an employee's disability regardless of whether it is work-related, and therefore the WSIB decision did not appropriately address the human rights issues.

Grant Moffatt v. Havelock Metal Products Inc., 2015 HRTO 1459

Geneviève Debané

Human rights application dismissed after applicant failed to attend preliminary teleconference hearing.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging the respondents blocked his access to the university's Wi-Fi network.

A preliminary hearing was scheduled by teleconference.

The applicant failed to join the teleconference despite having access to a phone and contacting tribunal staff.

The respondents' counsel attended and requested dismissal.

The Tribunal dismissed the application orally, finding the applicant failed to provide contact information as required and was capable of joining the call.

Rhéaume c. Université Laurentienne de Sudbury, 2015 HRTO 1457

Geneviève Debané

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioOct 23, 2015

Reconsideration request denied as the applicant failed to meet threshold criteria and merely reargued previous positions.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a previous Tribunal decision that dismissed his application alleging housing discrimination based on receipt of social assistance.

The applicant reiterated his position that the adjudicator should be disqualified and reargued issues related to his employment termination.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the applicant failed to meet the threshold criteria for reconsideration and was merely attempting to reargue positions already considered.

Hiamey v. Toronto Community Housing Corporation, 2015 HRTO 1422

Geneviève Debané

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioOct 13, 2015

Reconsideration request denied as applicant failed to meet threshold criteria.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a previous Tribunal decision that dismissed his human rights application for having no reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant argued he suffered from a disability during the relevant events.

The Tribunal denied the request, noting the original dismissal was based on a lack of evidence of prejudicial or discriminatory stereotypes, not a finding on disability.

The applicant failed to meet the threshold criteria for reconsideration.

Cesare Pella v. The Regional Municipality of Peel Police Services Board and William Osler Health Systems, 2015 HRTO 1360

Geneviève Debané

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioOct 9, 2015

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Tribunal correspondence.

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

The Tribunal sent multiple emails to the applicant requesting available dates to reschedule a summary hearing and warning that failure to respond could result in dismissal.

The applicant failed to respond to any correspondence.

The Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Gladir Azor v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Community and Social Services, Juliet Smith and Andrew Navratil, 2015 HRTO 1355

Geneviève Debané

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioOct 8, 2015

Interim remedy to bar Board of Directors from workplace denied due to jurisdictional and merit concerns.

The applicant, Executive Director of the corporate respondent, filed an application alleging discrimination and reprisal.

She requested an interim remedy to prevent the Board of Directors from attending the workplace until the application is heard.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, noting it has never ordered a Board of Directors to be barred from its premises, and expressing concerns about the merits and jurisdiction of the application.

The applicant was directed to file further submissions detailing the alleged Code infringements.

Fleming v. Lanark Welfare Society, 2015 HRTO 1352

Geneviève Debané

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Tribunal correspondence.

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

The application was deferred pending the resolution of a proceeding before the Law Society of Upper Canada.

The Tribunal subsequently sent two letters requesting a status update on the other proceeding, warning that failure to respond could result in dismissal for abandonment.

The applicant failed to respond to either letter.

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

Kathleen Chow v. Stanley Gershman, 2015 HRTO 1328

Geneviève Debané

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Tribunal's status inquiry.

The applicant filed an application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, which was deferred pending the conclusion of a disciplinary proceeding before the College of Teachers.

The Tribunal later requested an update on the status of the other proceeding, warning that failure to respond could result in dismissal for abandonment.

The respondents advised that the other proceeding had concluded, but the applicant failed to respond to the Tribunal's inquiry.

Consequently, the application was deemed abandoned and dismissed.

C.B. v. Toronto District School Board, 2015 HRTO 1326

Geneviève Debané

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent Employment Standards Act proceeding regarding termination.

The respondent sought to defer the human rights application alleging discrimination in employment pending the conclusion of a proceeding initiated by the applicant under the Employment Standards Act, 2000.

The Tribunal found that the ESA claim would examine the circumstances surrounding the applicant's termination from employment.

To avoid concurrent proceedings considering the same facts and potentially leading to contrary findings, the Tribunal deferred the application pending the conclusion of the ESA proceeding.

Miller v. Homes Instead Senior Care, 2015 HRTO 1324

Xavier Navarrete

5 cases2008–2021

Geneviève Debané

Request to defer human rights application pending potential arbitration denied due to unfairness to applicant.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment.

The respondent requested that the application be dismissed or deferred pending the conclusion of an arbitration proceeding pursuant to an independent contractor agreement.

The Tribunal denied the request, noting that the arbitration proceeding had not yet commenced and the applicant lacked the financial resources to pay for it.

The Tribunal found that deferring the application would result in unfairness to the applicant and ordered the respondent to file a fulsome response.

Levine v. Future Sales Ltd., 2015 HRTO 1323

John D. Campbell

32 cases2001–2025

Geneviève Debané

Request to reactivate deferred application denied as parallel WSIAT proceeding had not concluded.

The applicant requested to reactivate his human rights application, which had been deferred pending the conclusion of a proceeding before the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal (WSIAT).

The applicant argued that the WSIAT hearing dates were being rescheduled.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the WSIAT proceeding had not concluded and it was not appropriate to reactivate the matter at this time.

Istvan Kovarcsik v. Perpetual Properties Limited, 2015 HRTO 1321

Geneviève Debané

Practising Law - Employed1 case2015–2015

Reconsideration request denied as respondent merely repeated previously rejected arguments regarding liability and remedies.

The respondent, Centum Fundamental Financial Inc., requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that upheld a human rights application against it.

The respondent argued it should not be liable for the conduct of an independent mortgage agent and claimed it could not afford to retain an expert to develop a policy and provide training as ordered.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the respondent was merely repeating arguments already considered and rejected, and that the public interest remedies were appropriate given the respondent's lack of understanding of its obligations under the Code.

Joyceline Manu v. Centum Fundamental Financial Inc. and Russel Ramlochan, 2015 HRTO 1272

Josée Provost

Chantal Tie

30 cases2001–2017

Geneviève Debané

Applicant's request to amend human rights application granted on consent.

The applicant filed a request to amend his human rights application alleging discrimination in employment based on disability.

The respondent consented to the amendment.

The Tribunal granted the request to amend the application and directed the respondent to file any request to amend its response within 30 days.

Mathieu Beaudoin v. GR Regimbald Inc., 2015 HRTO 1271

Geneviève Debané

Reconsideration request dismissed as applicant failed to establish Tribunal jurisdiction over out-of-province events.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a previous Tribunal decision that dismissed his application for lack of jurisdiction.

The applicant argued that documents linked his file to another Tribunal file.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding that the applicant failed to establish any threshold criteria for reconsideration and did not explain how the Tribunal had jurisdiction over an agency providing services outside of Ontario for events that occurred outside the province.

Hicks v. Service de Police de la Ville de Gatineau, 2015 HRTO 1270

Justin Basinger

8 cases2013–2019

Geneviève Debané

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent union grievances regarding the same disciplinary suspensions.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination with respect to employment regarding three disciplinary suspensions imposed by her managers.

The applicant had also initiated three grievances through her union regarding the same disciplinary issues.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer the application pending the conclusion of the grievances.

Finding substantial overlap between the facts and allegations in the application and the grievances, the Tribunal deferred the application to avoid concurrent proceedings and inconsistent decisions.

Hoffman v. O’Hara, 2015 HRTO 1266

Geneviève Debané

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to attend mediation or respond to Tribunal.

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

A Notice of Mediation was issued, but the applicant failed to attend the scheduled mediation session and did not communicate with the Tribunal.

After the applicant failed to respond to a subsequent Tribunal direction warning of potential abandonment, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Johanne Venne v. Crisis Intervention Centre and Health Sciences North, 2015 HRTO 1263

Geneviève Debané

Employment and Labour Law

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent union grievance arbitration regarding employment termination.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination with respect to his termination from employment.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer because the applicant's union had filed a grievance regarding the same termination.

The intervenor union supported deferral, while the self-represented applicant objected.

The Tribunal found substantial overlap between the facts and allegations in the application and the grievance.

To avoid concurrent proceedings and inconsistent decisions, the Tribunal deferred the application pending the conclusion of the grievance arbitration.

Pavel Apanovitch v. Serta Simmons Holdings Bedding Canada Corporations, 2015 HRTO 1261

Applicant

Richard ColemanSelf-represented
1 appearance
Mafario AmicucciSelf-represented
1 appearance
Joseph BoyerSelf-represented
1 appearance
Cesare PellaSelf-represented
1 appearance
Guillaume KibaleSelf-represented
1 appearance
Godfred Kwaku HiameySelf-represented
1 appearance
Marc BourguignonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Ezra TaylorSelf-represented
1 appearance
Cheri DaviesSelf-represented
1 appearance
Allen RosarioSelf-represented
1 appearance
Lilly WiddisSelf-represented
1 appearance
Marvin LagaceSelf-represented
1 appearance
Chatebadhur BalchandSelf-represented
1 appearance
Senan HodonouSelf-represented
1 appearance
Karen DavisSelf-represented
1 appearance
Lewis CarrollSelf-represented
1 appearance
Renu VermaSelf-represented
1 appearance
J.D.Self-represented
1 appearance
Lydia SabourinSelf-represented
1 appearance
Janet BlommesteynSelf-represented
1 appearance

Counsel

Stephen MaioCounsel
2 appearances
Fatema DadaCounsel
1 appearance
Daniel McDonaldCounsel
1 appearance
Michael DoupeCounsel
1 appearance
Christopher M. WallaceCounsel
1 appearance
Ted KovacsCounsel
1 appearance
Andrea YorkCounsel
1 appearance
Rina M. LiCounsel
1 appearance
Chris DonszelmannCounsel
1 appearance
Rani KhanCounsel
1 appearance

for Canadian Auto Workers, Local 444

Piper HendersonCounsel
1 appearance

for Canadian Tire Corporation Ltd.

Meaghan RussellCounsel
1 appearance

for Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 146

Mona StaplesCounsel
1 appearance

for Cassellholme for the Aged

Lise EllisCounsel
1 appearance

for Centum Fundamental Financial Inc.

Victor HuoAgent
1 appearance

for Chrysler Canada Inc.

Clifford J. HartCounsel
1 appearance

for Collin & Diana Parker Sales Ltd.

Arthur P. TarasukCounsel
1 appearance

for David Mirvish

Stephen A. BernofskyCounsel
1 appearance

for Dr. Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry, Proposed Intervenor

Andrew McCutcheonCounsel
1 appearance

for Eastern Independent Telecommunications Ltd.

Jason WhiteAgent
1 appearance

for himself

Justin StylesSelf-represented
1 appearance
Ronald HarpelleSelf-represented
1 appearance
Russel RamlochanSelf-represented
1 appearance

for IATSE Local 822 (Toronto), IATSE Local 58 (Toronto), IATSE 129 (Hamilton), IATSE 461 Niagara, Cheryl Batulis, Heather Clarkson, Matthew D. Loeb, and Blair Egglestone

Andrea BowkerCounsel
1 appearance

for Marks Work Wearhouse Ltd., Canadian Tire Corporation, Limited and Donna Lodu

S. John PageCounsel
1 appearance

former representative for Mr. Liu

Kenny YauParalegal
1 appearance

for Pegasus Hospitality Group

Markos MarkoulisAgent
1 appearance

for Rogers Communications Partnership

Israel BalterCounsel
1 appearance

for the Affected Party

Sue LottCounsel
1 appearance

for the applicant

D.H.Self-represented
1 appearance
Susan HoustonAgent
1 appearance

for the Applicant

Self-representedSelf-represented
9 appearances
Mafario AmicucciSelf-represented
4 appearances
Nepthys AberdeenSelf-represented
4 appearances
Eric SabbahAgent
3 appearances
S.D.Self-represented
3 appearances
Jean-Alexandre De BousquetSelf-represented
3 appearances
Christine LundyAgent
3 appearances
Jean-Yves BernardSelf-represented
3 appearances
Rigaud BastienSelf-represented
3 appearances
Nagy RiadSelf-represented
3 appearances
Anthony HicksSelf-represented
2 appearances
Stevie Massela SikouSelf-represented
2 appearances
Keith AllenAgent
2 appearances
Joel ShusterSelf-represented
2 appearances
Ayoob KhanAgent
2 appearances
Abdullah MozaffarianSelf-represented
2 appearances
Eric LettsCounsel
2 appearances
Malek BouraouiSelf-represented
2 appearances
Leonard KerriganAgent
2 appearances
Rani KhanCounsel
2 appearances

for the Applicants

Doug MacCleodCounsel
1 appearance
A.B.Self-represented
1 appearance

for the City of Toronto, Myles Currie, Hector Moreno, Trevor Tenn, Ted MacMillan and John Murphy

Omo AkintanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario

Stephanie HobbsCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor

Barry KuretzkyCounsel
3 appearances
Samantha LambCounsel
2 appearances
Ian J. FellowsCounsel
2 appearances
Howard GoldblattCounsel
1 appearance
Mona StaplesCounsel
1 appearance
Danielle BisnarCounsel
1 appearance
Andrew MacIsaacCounsel
1 appearance
J. Craig MorrisonCounsel
1 appearance
Rochelle FoxCounsel
1 appearance
Ryan GoldvineCounsel
1 appearance
Michele Hamilton MeyersCounsel
1 appearance
Alycia ShawCounsel
1 appearance
Christopher PerriCounsel
1 appearance
Natalie WileyCounsel
1 appearance
John O’ReillyCounsel
1 appearance
Lisa LeinveerAgent
1 appearance
Mandy WojcikCounsel
1 appearance
Jerry RasoCounsel
1 appearance
Laurie KentCounsel
1 appearance

for the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board

Colin YoungmanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ministry of the Attorney General

Judith ParkerCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ontario Judicial Counsel

Geri SansonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed Intervenor

Gregory KoCounsel
1 appearance
Andrea LueyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed Respondent

Colin JohnstonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Regional Municipality of Peel Police Services Board

Patricia G. MurrayCounsel
1 appearance

for the respondent

Daniel McDonaldCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent

Joanna S. RainbowCounsel
3 appearances
Frank AngelettiCounsel
3 appearances
Ted KovacsCounsel
3 appearances
Newton WongCounsel
2 appearances
Christine EntaCounsel
2 appearances
Sari SpringerCounsel
2 appearances
Margot BlightCounsel
2 appearances
Saba ZiaCounsel
2 appearances
Judith ParkerCounsel
2 appearances
Lia ChiarottoCounsel
2 appearances
Stephen MaioCounsel
2 appearances
Patty MurrayCounsel
2 appearances
Michael WillsCounsel
2 appearances
Rob LevesqueAgent
1 appearance
Lise EllisAgent
1 appearance
Keri BennettCounsel
1 appearance
Robert BellCounsel
1 appearance
Xavier NavarreteCounsel
1 appearance
Jeanine WattCounsel
1 appearance
Stephen A. BernofskyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent and Proposed Respondents

Andrew ZabrovskyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent ARAMARK Canada Ltd.

George MacMasterAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Association de la police de l'Ontario

Michele Hamilton MayersCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent BramCity Taxi

Ron FolkesAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Centum Fundamental Financial Inc.

Victor HuoAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Conseil scolaire de district Catholique Centre-Sud

Christian PaquetteCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Daiva Lenauskus

Andrew McCutcheonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Dresden Industrial

Sven PoysaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board

Samantha CrumbCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Eaton Chelsea Hotel

Donna D’AndreaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent G4S Secure Solutions (Canada) Ltd

Tina BaldwinAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Hôpital Montfort

André ChampagneCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Joanne Euler

Jessica DiFedericoCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Le Syndicat Canadien de la fonction Publique et sa section locale 3189

Jean-Michel CorbeilCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent London Police Service

Frank A. AngelettiCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ministry of Community and Social Services

Benjamin ParryCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Minto Properties Inc.

Maria MavrikkouCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ontario College of Teachers

Lai-King HumCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ottawa Police

Iain AspenliederCounsel
1 appearance

for the respondents

Sonia PhilipszAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondents

Raj AnandCounsel
4 appearances
Sheryl JohnsonCounsel
2 appearances
Justin BasingerCounsel
2 appearances
Farah MalikCounsel
2 appearances
Jane M. GoodingCounsel
2 appearances
Lisa CabelCounsel
1 appearance
Neena GuptaCounsel
1 appearance
John D. CampbellCounsel
1 appearance
Marnie BacherCounsel
1 appearance
Jennifer RothSelf-represented
1 appearance
Patty MurrayCounsel
1 appearance
Derek CollinsCounsel
1 appearance
Pamela WakewichSelf-represented
1 appearance
Meredith GaydaCounsel
1 appearance
Sheila C. HandlerCounsel
1 appearance
Kristin BurnettSelf-represented
1 appearance
Mana KhamiCounsel
1 appearance
Mario DelgadoCounsel
1 appearance
Cheryl RovisCounsel
1 appearance
Patricia JasenSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondents 1960 Keel Investments Inc., Ira Marder, Shirley Marder, Michael Sosnowicz, Shlomo Marder, David Dunn, Merle Stein, David Rubin, Michael Harari, Iggy Florez, Marbrook Developments Limited, and D&D Associates Paralegal

David RubinAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondents Association des enseignantes et des enseignants franco-ontariens and Sack Goldblatt Mitchell LLP

Lise LeducCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Canadian Union of Public Employees and its Local 4721

Sue LottCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Sharon Galway

Vilija YcasAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Sheet Metal Workers International Association Local Union No. 540

Aaron HartCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Nelligan O’Brien Payne LLP and Julie Skinner

Sean McGeeCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Ontario Provincial Police and Wayne Morris

Marnie CorboldCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Résidence St. Louis (Bruyère Soins Continus) and Nicole McEachren

Andre ChampagneCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents The Regional Municipality of Peel and Mark Castro

Chantel MorrisonCounsel
1 appearance
Christopher SansonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent, The Ottawa Hospital

Raquel ChisolmCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Regional Municipality of Peel Police Services Board

Patricia G. MurrayCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent, The Regional Municipality of Peel Police Services Board

Patricia G. MurrayCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Toyota Motor Manufacturing Inc.

Ted KovacsCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 333

Laurie KentCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent University Health Network

Naomi MargoCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent University of Ontario Institute of Technology

Cheryl FoyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Workplace Safety and Insurance Board

Greg BullenCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent Zeta Psi Social Fraternity

Kim DuongCounsel
1 appearance

for the Toronto Civic Employees Union, Local 416 and Alex Krebelj

Devon PaulCounsel
1 appearance

for Wendy Benson

David DeluzioCounsel
1 appearance

for William Osler Health Systems

Melanie de WitCounsel
1 appearance

Next Friend

M.D.Agent
1 appearance

on behalf of Danny Liu

Vartan ManoukianCounsel
1 appearance

on behalf of herself and J.P

V.P.Self-represented
1 appearance

On her own behalf

Navneet SinghSelf-represented
1 appearance

on the applicant's behalf

Susan HoustonAgent
1 appearance

pour la requérante

Lyne DrapeauSelf-represented
1 appearance
Odile CoiminSelf-represented
1 appearance
Sylia ArsenaultSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kibondo Max KilongoziCounsel
1 appearance
Bernadette KanyindaSelf-represented
1 appearance
Chantal TieCounsel
1 appearance

pour le requérant

Karimou Dia HantchiSelf-represented
1 appearance
Marc Elie OstainvilSelf-represented
1 appearance
J.A. Gilles FortinSelf-represented
1 appearance
Stéphane VilleneuveSelf-represented
1 appearance

pour les intimées

Sébastien HuardCounsel
1 appearance

pour les intimés

Noëlle CalorenCounsel
1 appearance
Christine LonsdaleCounsel
1 appearance
André ChampagneCounsel
1 appearance
Gabriel PoliquinCounsel
1 appearance
Annie BerthiaumeCounsel
1 appearance

pour l'intervenant

Benjamin PiperCounsel
1 appearance
Mona StaplesCounsel
1 appearance

pour l'intimé

Marc DelormeCounsel
1 appearance
Annie BerthiaumeCounsel
1 appearance

pour l'intimée

Jean-Rodrigue YobouaCounsel
1 appearance
David M. BolgerCounsel
1 appearance

pour l'intimée Joanne David

Kevin MacNeillCounsel
1 appearance

pour l'intimée proposée

Lise LeducCounsel
1 appearance

pour l'intimé proposé

Paul MarshallCounsel
1 appearance

procureur

Owen M. ReesCounsel
1 appearance
Paul MarshallCounsel
1 appearance

procureurs

Christian PaquetteCounsel
1 appearance
Claire VachonCounsel
1 appearance

Representative

Agnes WintersingerAgent
1 appearance

Representative, Self-represented

A.B.Self-represented
1 appearance

Respondent

Andrew N. ZabrovskyCounsel
1 appearance
Danny LiuSelf-represented
1 appearance

Self-represented

Hong Bing (Richard) WangSelf-represented
1 appearance
Mazigh MassylesSelf-represented
1 appearance
Janet BlommesteynSelf-represented
1 appearance
Jaime CastellanosSelf-represented
1 appearance

se représentant lui-même

Ronald GariepySelf-represented
1 appearance
Marc Elie OstainvilSelf-represented
1 appearance

Se représentant lui-même

Étienne MouajouSelf-represented
1 appearance

Se représente lui-même

Godfred Kwaku HiameySelf-represented
1 appearance

487

Decisions

Years active

Tribunals

8.1

cases/mo

HRTO487(100%)

Decision types

motion

465

trial

/Adjudicator

Geneviève Debané — Vice-chair

Human Rights

Administrative Law

Other Tribunals

Landlord and Tenant

Bankruptcy and Insolvency Law

Family and Matrimonial Law

Workers' Compensation

Geneviève Debané

Vice-chair·Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario·Since 2011

487

cases · 6 yrs · HRTO

Trial

Motion

Costs

Appeal

Sentencing

Vice-chair· 386Adjudicator· 48Vice-chair· 24Vice-présidente· 23Adjudicator· 3Arbitre· 1

Gabriel Poliquin

2 cases2015–2017

Chantal Tie

30 cases2001–2017

Geneviève Debané

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioNov 6, 2015

Demande de modification de la requête accueillie; l'allégation de licenciement avait déjà été soulevée dans la réplique.

La requérante a demandé de modifier sa requête en matière de droits de la personne pour inclure des allégations selon lesquelles son licenciement était discriminatoire.

Les intimés s'y sont opposés, arguant que la demande était hors délai.

Zakaria c. Centre Éducatif des Bécasseaux, 2015 HRTO 1497

Geneviève Debané

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioNov 6, 2015

Human rights application alleging police reprisal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

Sikou v. Service de Police de la Ville d’Ottawa, 2015 HRTO 1496

Geneviève Debané

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioNov 4, 2015

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Tribunal directions.

The respondent filed a Request for Summary Hearing.

The applicant failed to file a response.

The Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction warning the applicant that failure to respond could result in the application being dismissed as abandoned.

The applicant did not comply with the direction.

Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the human rights application as abandoned.

Lana Delaney v. Mills Business Group, 2015 HRTO 1485

J. Christopher Russell

In Private Practice4 cases2015–2026

Geneviève Debané

Request to dismiss human rights application denied; WSIB decision on work-relatedness did not address duty to accommodate.

The respondent employer sought to dismiss the human rights application under s. 45.1 of the Human Rights Code, arguing the substance was dealt with by the WSIB.

The WSIB had previously disallowed the applicant's claim for benefits, finding his knee injury was not work-related.

Grant Moffatt v. Havelock Metal Products Inc., 2015 HRTO 1459

Geneviève Debané

Human rights application dismissed after applicant failed to attend preliminary teleconference hearing.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging the respondents blocked his access to the university's Wi-Fi network.

A preliminary hearing was scheduled by teleconference.

The applicant failed to join the teleconference despite having access to a phone and contacting tribunal staff.

The respondents' counsel attended and requested dismissal.

The Tribunal dismissed the application orally, finding the applicant failed to provide contact information as required and was capable of joining the call.

Rhéaume c. Université Laurentienne de Sudbury, 2015 HRTO 1457

Geneviève Debané

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioOct 23, 2015

Reconsideration request denied as the applicant failed to meet threshold criteria and merely reargued previous positions.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a previous Tribunal decision that dismissed his application alleging housing discrimination based on receipt of social assistance.

The applicant reiterated his position that the adjudicator should be disqualified and reargued issues related to his employment termination.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the applicant failed to meet the threshold criteria for reconsideration and was merely attempting to reargue positions already considered.

Hiamey v. Toronto Community Housing Corporation, 2015 HRTO 1422

Geneviève Debané

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioOct 13, 2015

Reconsideration request denied as applicant failed to meet threshold criteria.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a previous Tribunal decision that dismissed his human rights application for having no reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant argued he suffered from a disability during the relevant events.

The Tribunal denied the request, noting the original dismissal was based on a lack of evidence of prejudicial or discriminatory stereotypes, not a finding on disability.

The applicant failed to meet the threshold criteria for reconsideration.

Cesare Pella v. The Regional Municipality of Peel Police Services Board and William Osler Health Systems, 2015 HRTO 1360

Geneviève Debané

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioOct 9, 2015

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Tribunal correspondence.

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

The Tribunal sent multiple emails to the applicant requesting available dates to reschedule a summary hearing and warning that failure to respond could result in dismissal.

The applicant failed to respond to any correspondence.

The Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Gladir Azor v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Community and Social Services, Juliet Smith and Andrew Navratil, 2015 HRTO 1355

Geneviève Debané

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioOct 8, 2015

Interim remedy to bar Board of Directors from workplace denied due to jurisdictional and merit concerns.

The applicant, Executive Director of the corporate respondent, filed an application alleging discrimination and reprisal.

She requested an interim remedy to prevent the Board of Directors from attending the workplace until the application is heard.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, noting it has never ordered a Board of Directors to be barred from its premises, and expressing concerns about the merits and jurisdiction of the application.

The applicant was directed to file further submissions detailing the alleged Code infringements.

Fleming v. Lanark Welfare Society, 2015 HRTO 1352

Geneviève Debané

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Tribunal correspondence.

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

The application was deferred pending the resolution of a proceeding before the Law Society of Upper Canada.

The Tribunal subsequently sent two letters requesting a status update on the other proceeding, warning that failure to respond could result in dismissal for abandonment.

The applicant failed to respond to either letter.

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

Kathleen Chow v. Stanley Gershman, 2015 HRTO 1328

Geneviève Debané

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to respond to Tribunal's status inquiry.

The applicant filed an application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, which was deferred pending the conclusion of a disciplinary proceeding before the College of Teachers.

The Tribunal later requested an update on the status of the other proceeding, warning that failure to respond could result in dismissal for abandonment.

The respondents advised that the other proceeding had concluded, but the applicant failed to respond to the Tribunal's inquiry.

Consequently, the application was deemed abandoned and dismissed.

C.B. v. Toronto District School Board, 2015 HRTO 1326

Geneviève Debané

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent Employment Standards Act proceeding regarding termination.

The Tribunal found that the ESA claim would examine the circumstances surrounding the applicant's termination from employment.

To avoid concurrent proceedings considering the same facts and potentially leading to contrary findings, the Tribunal deferred the application pending the conclusion of the ESA proceeding.

Miller v. Homes Instead Senior Care, 2015 HRTO 1324

Xavier Navarrete

5 cases2008–2021

Geneviève Debané

Request to defer human rights application pending potential arbitration denied due to unfairness to applicant.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment.

The respondent requested that the application be dismissed or deferred pending the conclusion of an arbitration proceeding pursuant to an independent contractor agreement.

The Tribunal denied the request, noting that the arbitration proceeding had not yet commenced and the applicant lacked the financial resources to pay for it.

The Tribunal found that deferring the application would result in unfairness to the applicant and ordered the respondent to file a fulsome response.

Levine v. Future Sales Ltd., 2015 HRTO 1323

John D. Campbell

32 cases2001–2025

Geneviève Debané

Request to reactivate deferred application denied as parallel WSIAT proceeding had not concluded.

The applicant requested to reactivate his human rights application, which had been deferred pending the conclusion of a proceeding before the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal (WSIAT).

The applicant argued that the WSIAT hearing dates were being rescheduled.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the WSIAT proceeding had not concluded and it was not appropriate to reactivate the matter at this time.

Istvan Kovarcsik v. Perpetual Properties Limited, 2015 HRTO 1321

Geneviève Debané

Practising Law - Employed1 case2015–2015

Reconsideration request denied as respondent merely repeated previously rejected arguments regarding liability and remedies.

The respondent, Centum Fundamental Financial Inc., requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that upheld a human rights application against it.

The respondent argued it should not be liable for the conduct of an independent mortgage agent and claimed it could not afford to retain an expert to develop a policy and provide training as ordered.

Joyceline Manu v. Centum Fundamental Financial Inc. and Russel Ramlochan, 2015 HRTO 1272

Josée Provost

Chantal Tie

30 cases2001–2017

Geneviève Debané

Applicant's request to amend human rights application granted on consent.

The applicant filed a request to amend his human rights application alleging discrimination in employment based on disability.

The respondent consented to the amendment.

The Tribunal granted the request to amend the application and directed the respondent to file any request to amend its response within 30 days.

Mathieu Beaudoin v. GR Regimbald Inc., 2015 HRTO 1271

Geneviève Debané

Reconsideration request dismissed as applicant failed to establish Tribunal jurisdiction over out-of-province events.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a previous Tribunal decision that dismissed his application for lack of jurisdiction.

The applicant argued that documents linked his file to another Tribunal file.

Hicks v. Service de Police de la Ville de Gatineau, 2015 HRTO 1270

Justin Basinger

8 cases2013–2019

Geneviève Debané

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent union grievances regarding the same disciplinary suspensions.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination with respect to employment regarding three disciplinary suspensions imposed by her managers.

The applicant had also initiated three grievances through her union regarding the same disciplinary issues.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer the application pending the conclusion of the grievances.

Finding substantial overlap between the facts and allegations in the application and the grievances, the Tribunal deferred the application to avoid concurrent proceedings and inconsistent decisions.

Hoffman v. O’Hara, 2015 HRTO 1266

Geneviève Debané

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to attend mediation or respond to Tribunal.

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

A Notice of Mediation was issued, but the applicant failed to attend the scheduled mediation session and did not communicate with the Tribunal.

After the applicant failed to respond to a subsequent Tribunal direction warning of potential abandonment, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Johanne Venne v. Crisis Intervention Centre and Health Sciences North, 2015 HRTO 1263

Geneviève Debané