Ken Bhattacharjee

Applicant ordered to release internal medical records to allow respondents to file a meaningful response.

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

The respondents brought a Request for an Order During Proceedings seeking access to the applicant's medical documents held by the school board's Disability Management department, arguing they could not meaningfully respond without them.

The Tribunal granted the request, ordering the applicant to sign a consent form waiving confidentiality and granting the respondents an extension of time to file their Response until 35 days after the consent form is provided.

Hamilton v. York Region District School Board, 2015 HRTO 1142

Ken Bhattacharjee

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

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

The respondent filed a response requesting early dismissal on the basis that the applicant had signed a full and final release.

The Tribunal directed the applicant to file written submissions in response to the request for early dismissal and warned that failure to do so could result in the application being dismissed as abandoned.

The applicant failed to file submissions by the deadline.

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

Dolan v. Diageo Canada Inc., 2015 HRTO 1140

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 26, 2015

Human rights application dismissed as out of time because the nearly three-year delay was not incurred in good faith.

The applicant filed a human rights application nearly three years after the last alleged incident of discrimination, which related to his termination and a subsequent union grievance settlement.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because the application appeared to be outside the one-year limitation period under section 34(1) of the Human Rights Code.

The applicant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the delay.

The Tribunal found that the delay was not incurred in good faith and dismissed the application on a preliminary basis.

Shaw v. Bombardier Transportation, 2015 HRTO 1132

Ken Bhattacharjee

Human rights application dismissed at preliminary stage for failing to connect police conduct to Code grounds.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination by the police with respect to services based on race and ethnic origin.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because the application failed to explain how the alleged mistreatment was connected to a Code ground.

The applicant re-filed the same documents without addressing the Notice.

The Tribunal dismissed the application on a preliminary basis, finding it plain and obvious that the allegations were outside its jurisdiction as they were not connected to any Code grounds.

Voykin v. Ottawa Police, 2015 HRTO 1096

Pasqualino Di Monte

Ken Bhattacharjee

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent Landlord and Tenant Board proceeding.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging housing discrimination and reprisal.

The respondent requested that the application be deferred pending the conclusion of an ongoing proceeding before the Landlord and Tenant Board involving the same facts.

The Tribunal granted the deferral to avoid duplication of evidence and the possibility of inconsistent findings of fact and law.

Zawadowski v. CBC Investments, 2015 HRTO 1090

Human rights application dismissed under s. 45.1 as prior grievance settlement appropriately dealt with its substance.

The applicant, a teacher, filed a human rights application alleging gender-based harassment and discrimination by the respondent, her school principal.

Prior to the application, the applicant's union had filed grievances against the school board regarding the respondent's conduct, which were resolved through Minutes of Settlement that included $10,000 in human rights damages for the applicant and a growth plan for the respondent.

The respondent requested that the application be dismissed under s. 45.1 of the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal found that the grievance proceeding appropriately dealt with the substance of the application and that it would not be unfair to dismiss it, as the applicant had received monetary and non-monetary remedies in the prior proceeding.

Rosalie Griffith v. Patrick Knight, 2015 HRTO 1075

Greg Bullen

50 cases2009–2019

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 10, 2015

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent WSIB appeal regarding benefit reduction.

The applicant, an injured worker, filed a human rights application alleging discrimination after the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board reduced his wage loss benefits for failing to comply with a Work Transition plan.

The respondent requested that the Tribunal defer the application pending the conclusion of the applicant's ongoing appeal before the respondent's Appeal Branch.

The Tribunal found that deferral was the most fair, just, and expeditious way to proceed, as there was a clear overlap in facts and issues, raising the potential for duplication and inconsistent findings.

The application was deferred.

McKee v. Workplace Safety and Insurance Board, 2015 HRTO 1059

Victoria Shen

Practising Law - Employed11 cases2010–2016

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 7, 2015

Tribunal grants uncontradicted request to add franchisor as respondent and reduce damages claimed.

The applicant filed an application alleging that the respondent franchisee discriminated against him on the basis of disability by using a discriminatory job application form.

The applicant brought a request for an order during the proceeding to amend the application to add the franchisor, Pet Valu Canada Inc., as a respondent, and to reduce the damages claimed.

The applicant alleged that the franchisor provided the standard form and directed its use.

As the request was uncontradicted, the Tribunal applied the test for adding a respondent and granted the amendments.

David Kergan v. Bark-er Pets Inc. and Pet Valu Canada Inc., 2015 HRTO 1057

Xiao Jin Chen

Not Practising Law - Employed1 case2015–2015

Shaheynoor Talukder

In Private Practice2 cases2015–2026

Allison Pyper

16 cases2014–2018

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 29, 2015

Human rights application alleging disability discrimination in employment dismissed for no reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant, a software developer with a physical disability, alleged that the respondent terminated his employment after one month because of his disability.

The respondent argued that the termination was due to performance issues and the cancellation of the project by its funder.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application had a reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's theory of discrimination was largely speculative and that there was no reasonable prospect he could prove a link between his termination and his disability.

The application was dismissed.

Abbasi v. Sygenics Inc., 2015 HRTO 1014

Peter Osborne

Andrew Porter

9 cases2015–2025

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 15, 2015

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent proceeding before the HPARB.

The respondents requested to dismiss or defer the human rights application on the basis that the facts and issues were currently before the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board (HPARB).

The Tribunal found that deferral was the most fair, just, and expeditious way of proceeding, as concurrent proceedings dealing with the same issues raise the possibility of inconsistent decisions.

The application was deferred pending the conclusion of the HPARB proceeding.

Beverley Tingling v. College of Psychologists of Ontario, 2015 HRTO 933

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 14, 2015

Late adjournment request granted due to work conflict; next hearing date made peremptory.

The respondent requested an adjournment of the scheduled hearing due to an unavoidable work commitment involving an important audit.

The request was made more than 14 days after the Notice of Hearing was issued, requiring the respondent to demonstrate extraordinary circumstances under the Tribunal's Practice Direction.

The Tribunal granted the adjournment, finding that the respondent was caught between attending work and attending the hearing, but ordered that the next hearing date be peremptory to the respondent.

Jing An v. Xiaoyang Liu, 2015 HRTO 928

Ken Bhattacharjee

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

The applicant filed a human rights application which was deferred pending the conclusion of an ongoing Employment Standards proceeding.

The Tribunal subsequently requested an update on the status of the parallel proceeding and warned that failure to respond could result in dismissal for abandonment.

After the applicant and her representative failed to respond to multiple communications, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Augustin v. Platinum Electrical Contractors Inc., 2015 HRTO 889

Ken Bhattacharjee

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

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

She failed to attend a scheduled mediation session and did not communicate with the Tribunal to explain her absence.

The Tribunal sent a letter warning that failure to respond within ten days could result in the application being deemed abandoned.

The applicant did not respond.

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

Rampersaud v. Arden Holdings Inc., 2015 HRTO 888

Brian Silva

7 cases2013–2016

Ken Bhattacharjee

Human rights application dismissed under s. 45.1 as prior Employment Standards proceeding dealt with the substance.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging she was terminated from her employment as a nanny because of her pregnancy.

She had previously filed an Employment Standards claim regarding the same termination, which resulted in an award for lost wages and general damages.

The Tribunal held a preliminary hearing to determine whether the application should be dismissed under s. 45.1 of the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal found that the Employment Standards proceeding appropriately dealt with the substance of the application and that it would not be unfair to dismiss the application.

The application was dismissed to avoid relitigation of essentially the same dispute.

Smith v. Singh, 2015 HRTO 887

Erin Payne

Alexander Kowal

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 2, 2015

Human rights application alleging discrimination in hiring dismissed on preliminary basis for no reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant, a Black man originally from Ethiopia, alleged that the respondent discriminated against him on the basis of race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, ethnic origin, and age when it excluded him from further consideration for a Java Programmer position after an initial interview.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application had a reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's evidence, which relied on subjective observations about the racial composition of the waiting room and the interviewers' alleged shock at his appearance, was insufficient to establish a link between his exclusion and the prohibited grounds.

The application was dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success.

Seyoum v. Evertz Microsystems Ltd., 2015 HRTO 883

Carmine Scalzi

2 cases2013–2015

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 25, 2015

Applicant's premature request for particulars and early document production denied prior to completion of pleadings.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging employment discrimination.

Before filing his Reply, the applicant requested an order for particulars and early production of documents from the respondent.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that pleadings should be completed before raising preliminary matters and that no exceptional circumstances justified early document production prior to the issuance of a Notice of Hearing.

Bruno v. North York Chrysler Jeep Dodge Ram Fiat (“NYC”), 2015 HRTO 855

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 24, 2015

Application reactivated and preliminary hearing rescheduled following conclusion of related Court of Appeal proceeding.

The respondent requested that the application be reactivated following the conclusion of a related proceeding before the Ontario Court of Appeal.

The Tribunal ordered the application reactivated and directed the Registrar to reschedule the preliminary hearing.

Grace Ren v. College of Massage Therapists of Ontario, 2015 HRTO 848

Sharlene Ziniuk

Practising Law - Employed8 cases2011–2016

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 16, 2015

Second human rights application dismissed as abuse of process for re-litigating previously dismissed claims.

The applicant filed a second human rights application alleging discrimination based on sex regarding the enforcement of a child support order by the Family Responsibility Office.

The Tribunal had previously dismissed his first application on the same facts as out of time.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing and dismissed the second application as an abuse of process, finding it was an attempt to re-litigate the first application.

However, the Tribunal declined the respondent's request to declare the applicant a vexatious litigant, noting he is a self-represented layperson and filing one further application did not amount to persistently instituting vexatious proceedings.

Ernst Goetze v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Community and Social Services (Family Responsibility Office), 2015 HRTO 796

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 12, 2015

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after neither party attended the scheduled hearing.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment.

A hearing was scheduled, but neither party attended or contacted the Tribunal to explain their absence.

The Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Dobrolioubov v. Toro Aluminum Group of Companies, 2015 HRTO 786

Christine Ashton

In Private Practice8 cases2013–2023

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 5, 2015

Human rights application dismissed as untimely because the delay in filing was not incurred in good faith.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of race, origin, and disability following the termination of his employment.

The respondents requested a summary hearing to dismiss the application as untimely, as it was filed more than one year after the termination.

The Tribunal found that the last alleged incident of discrimination occurred on the date of termination, making the application approximately three weeks late.

The Tribunal rejected the applicant's arguments that the delay was incurred in good faith due to an acute stress disorder, union delays in processing his grievance, and his lawyer's delay in advising him of his rights under the Code.

The application was dismissed.

Biniam Icallo v. Oak Leaf Confections and Ion Leoveanu, 2015 HRTO 742

Applicant

Mike NaraineSelf-represented
2 appearances
John InglisSelf-represented
1 appearance
Ralph MazeSelf-represented
1 appearance
Tom RabaSelf-represented
1 appearance
Mario HawcoSelf-represented
1 appearance
Stanley DombroskieSelf-represented
1 appearance
Barbara HoekstraSelf-represented
1 appearance
Richard ToderanSelf-represented
1 appearance
Henry DelaneySelf-represented
1 appearance
Angela OlaskiSelf-represented
1 appearance
Paul RadoiSelf-represented
1 appearance
Marcio CabralSelf-represented
1 appearance
Michael HarveySelf-represented
1 appearance
Stephanie de KoningSelf-represented
1 appearance
Steven GerredSelf-represented
1 appearance
Ruth CameronSelf-represented
1 appearance
Emile WickhamSelf-represented
1 appearance
Jeffrey KiersSelf-represented
1 appearance
Sharna SugarmanSelf-represented
1 appearance
S.D.Self-represented
1 appearance

Counsel

Peigi RossCounsel
2 appearances
Cathy PhanCounsel
1 appearance
Paula M. RusakCounsel
1 appearance
Cheryl EllisonCounsel
1 appearance
Thomas A. StefanikCounsel
1 appearance
John-Paul AlexandrowiczCounsel
1 appearance
Nadia ChandraCounsel
1 appearance
Stephanie M. RamsayCounsel
1 appearance
Elizabeth TraynorCounsel
1 appearance
Joseph GriffithsCounsel
1 appearance
David M. GoodmanCounsel
1 appearance
Caroline V. (Nini) JonesCounsel
1 appearance
Tyler InksterCounsel
1 appearance
Lily HarmerCounsel
1 appearance
Elizabeth CowieCounsel
1 appearance
Patricia MatusiakCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for Applicant

Ernest GuisteCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for Respondents

Jennifer FantiniCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Respondents

Leola PonCounsel
1 appearance

for Altis Human Resources (Ottawa) Inc.

Cindy SpenceAgent
1 appearance

for Andorra Building Maintenance Ltd.

Michael AlexanderCounsel
1 appearance

for Baywood Homes

Michael A. CohenCounsel
1 appearance

for Beck Taxi Limited

Carl PetersonCounsel
1 appearance
Lauren Chang MacLeanCounsel
1 appearance

for both Applicants

Taleh HuseynovSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Bruce Johnston

Melany FranklinCounsel
1 appearance

for Dr. Victor Wai-Lee Chiu

Yashoda RanganathanCounsel
1 appearance

for himself

Felix MillienSelf-represented
1 appearance
Irfan ButtSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Hurley Corporation, Joe Cunha, Evelyn Hewitt, and Manny Silva

Gavin ClingbineAgent
1 appearance

for IIWI Foods Inc. and Gordon Macleod

Rachel GoldenbergCounsel
1 appearance

for Jodie Huber and Rick Pereira

Kumail KarimjeeCounsel
1 appearance

for Linda Tougas HR Consulting Inc. and Linda Tougas

Dan PalayewCounsel
1 appearance

for Loblaws Inc., Respondent

Gordon FitzgeraldCounsel
1 appearance

for Margaret Laurence Housing Co-operative, Julie Murphy, Debbie August-Moffat, Stephen English, Raymond Ouellet, Mark Smith, Napoleon Mulsa, Dum Siziba, and Lisa Forestell

Luke J. SaitesCounsel
1 appearance

for McDonald’s Restaurants of Canada Limited

Russell GrovesCounsel
1 appearance

for Regional Tourism Organization Four Inc. and David Peacock

Christopher McClellandCounsel
1 appearance

for Robert Half International

James D. HeeneyCounsel
1 appearance

for Service Employees International Union Local 2, Brewery, General & Professional Workers’ Union

Bruce PriceCounsel
1 appearance

for Sherilyn Koenig

Jerry RasoCounsel
1 appearance

for Simerra Property Management Inc. and Simcoe Standard Condominium Corporation No. 338

James B. TausendfreundCounsel
1 appearance

for Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre

Maria McDonaldCounsel
1 appearance

for the Affected Organization

Martin CerquaUnion representative
1 appearance

for the Affected Party

Natasha De MennaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Applicant

Trevor SmithAgent
7 appearances
Self-representedSelf-represented
6 appearances
Mary Jane CampigottoCounsel
5 appearances
Margaret WaySelf-represented
4 appearances
Christine LundyAgent
4 appearances
Victoria ShenCounsel
3 appearances
Collin DolnySelf-represented
3 appearances
Andrea AndersonSelf-represented
3 appearances
Christine LongtinSelf-represented
3 appearances
Susan DevoeSelf-represented
3 appearances
Selwyn PietersSelf-represented
3 appearances
S.D.Self-represented
3 appearances
Melissa MarkCounsel
3 appearances
Cecil NormanAgent
3 appearances
Sean FlahertyCounsel
2 appearances
Corey ChandlerSelf-represented
2 appearances
Clara MathesonCounsel
2 appearances
Ernst GoetzeSelf-represented
2 appearances
Najeem EbrahimiAgent
2 appearances
Richard ClarkeSelf-represented
2 appearances

for the Applicants

Barbara HoekstraSelf-represented
2 appearances
Sharan BasranCounsel
1 appearance
Bradley TruaxAgent
1 appearance
Nicholas MiniganSelf-represented
1 appearance
Shawn WestonAgent
1 appearance
Eric LettsCounsel
1 appearance
Donna WilsonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Patrick JamesCounsel
1 appearance
John DoneCounsel
1 appearance
Lori MishibinijimaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 79

J. James NymanCounsel
1 appearance

for The Christian Reformed Church in North America – Canada Corporation, The Christian Reformed Church in North America, and Classis Hamilton

Sean JacksonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor

Susan BallantyneCounsel
1 appearance
Laurie KentCounsel
1 appearance
Michael McCrearyCounsel
1 appearance
Howard GoldblattCounsel
1 appearance
Alycia ShawCounsel
1 appearance
Devon PaulCounsel
1 appearance
Pavle MasicCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ontario Nurses' Association

Colin JohnsonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ontario Public Service Employees Union

Ed HolmesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed Intervenor

Katherine FerreiraCounsel
1 appearance

for the Proposed Respondent

Elyse MallinsCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent

Nancy Jammu-TaylorCounsel
6 appearances
Sari SpringerCounsel
4 appearances
Daniel McDonaldCounsel
4 appearances
Erin PorterCounsel
3 appearances
Thomas StefanikCounsel
3 appearances
Carita PereiraCounsel
2 appearances
Christopher BurkettCounsel
2 appearances
Saba ZiaCounsel
2 appearances
Sean JacksonCounsel
2 appearances
Jordana JosephCounsel
2 appearances
Adrian MiedemaCounsel
2 appearances
Andrea YorkCounsel
2 appearances
Samantha ThorntonAgent
2 appearances
Matthew OrchardCounsel
1 appearance
C. April StewartAgent
1 appearance
Lucy SiracoCounsel
1 appearance
Shaheynoor TalukderCounsel
1 appearance
Lorraine PorCounsel
1 appearance
Roy FilionCounsel
1 appearance
Robert J. AtkinsonCounsel
1 appearance

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

Suzanne PorterCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Andrea Sequeira

Nicole ChrolaviciusCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Andriy Tsurkan

Andriy TsurkanSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent Anthony Hutchinson

Anthony HutchinsonSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent Bombardier Transportation Canada Inc.

Michael HorvatCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Brant Artillery Gunners Club Incorporated

Michael WhiteCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Canadian Union of Public Employees and its Local 133

Mona StaplesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Cotton Inc.

Bradley J. TroupCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent DTZ Canada Incorporated

William T. MaccoCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent ECE Distribution Ltd. o/a Branded Merchandise and Proposed Respondent Cooney Promotions Inc.

John A. AnnenCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent George Cole

Raj AnandCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Giuseppe Alessandro

Richard KestenAgent
1 appearance
Tom GagovskiAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Henry Rivas

Crista ReaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Hudson Bay Company

Maria KotsopoulosCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Loblaw Companies Limited

Zoe KingCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Michael Burns

Daniel CondonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Office of the Independent Police Review Director

Jean C.H. IuCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent R.A. Centre

Andrew ListerCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Right at Home Realty Inc. Brokerage

Michael WeberAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Rohan Chinniah

Philip KlumakCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Russian Student Association (RSA) at University of Toronto

Valentin SotovAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ryder Truck Rental Canada Ltd.

Andrew BrattCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents

Lyne LavergneCounsel
3 appearances
John-Paul AlexandrowiczCounsel
3 appearances
Brian SilvaCounsel
2 appearances
Nick StilloSelf-represented
2 appearances
Omo AkintanCounsel
2 appearances
Bruce DormanSelf-represented
2 appearances
Geneviève DebanéCounsel
2 appearances
William BourneSelf-represented
2 appearances
Elaine BourneSelf-represented
2 appearances
Leola PonCounsel
1 appearance
Glenn ChristieCounsel
1 appearance
Laura K. WilliamsCounsel
1 appearance
David TurnerCounsel
1 appearance
Richard WilliamsSelf-represented
1 appearance
Andrew PorterCounsel
1 appearance
Pranavan GaneshalingamSelf-represented
1 appearance
Peter OsborneCounsel
1 appearance
Andrew CooperSelf-represented
1 appearance
Brennagh SmithCounsel
1 appearance
Allison TaylorCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Service Employees International Union Local 1 Canada

Helen NowakCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Service Employees International Union Local 2, Brewery, General & Professional Workers’ Union

Bruce PriceCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Fanshawe College of Applied Arts and Technology, Scott Dart, and Jeff Low

David FosterCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Imrana Jeoffrey and James Hanson

Vicky SattaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Michael McInnis and Constantina Tsilimigras

Jeffrey AndrewCounsel
1 appearance
Andrew MacIsaacCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents The Algonquin College of Applied Arts and Technology, Cynthia Poulin, Amandah Selvey, Reuben Helder, Louise Cowley, and Marjan Ghannad

Chris RutherfordCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents The Governing Council of the University of Toronto and Vera Bril

Sari SpringerCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents The Regional Municipality of York Police Services Board, Andrew Burford, Olena Duff, Carley Nisbett, John Parker, Chris Palmer, Darren Hodskins, Ron Peever, Barbara Sanders, Brad Plummer, and Cathy Mathews

Anthony DeianaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Stuart Schoeman

Matthew A. FisherCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent TD Bank Group

Pierre BitzAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Teamsters Canada Rail Conference – Division 660

Laura ReaumeAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario

Michelle GibbsCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls

Mark MasonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Governing Council of the University of Toronto

Sari SpringerCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent The TDL Group Corporation

James D. HeeneyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Thunder Bay Police Association

Katie RowenCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Thunder Bay Police Services Board

Robert EdwardsCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Toronto Police Services Board

David GourlayCounsel
1 appearance
Antonella CeddiaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Unifor

Mike ArmstrongAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent United Food and Commercial Workers Union Canada, Local 175

Marcia BarryCounsel
1 appearance
Erin WallaceCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent University Health Network

Naomi MargoCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Voysus Group Inc.

Kashif RazaAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent West Park Healthcare Centre

Sarah EvesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent William Blair

Adam GuyCounsel
2 appearances
Lisa CabelCounsel
1 appearance
Naomi CallaCounsel
1 appearance
Melany FranklinCounsel
1 appearance

for the Toronto Catholic District School Board, Desi Smulan and Rose Balmbra

Paul MatthewsCounsel
1 appearance

for the Toronto Police Services Board

David GourlayCounsel
1 appearance
Antonella CeddiaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Union

J. James NymanCounsel
1 appearance

for Thomas Gold Pettingill LLP

Lambert BoendersCounsel
1 appearance

for Toronto Cricket Skating and Curling Club

Assunta MazzottaCounsel
1 appearance

for Toronto Police Services Board, William Blair and Larry Sinclair

Ian SolomonCounsel
1 appearance

for United Food and Commercial Workers Canada, Local 1000A

Jeff AndrewCounsel
1 appearance

for United Food and Commercial Workers Union Canada, Local 175

Marcia BarryCounsel
1 appearance
Erin WallaceCounsel
1 appearance

for United Steelworkers Local 252G

Dale HoggUnion representative
1 appearance

for William Blair

Adam GuyCounsel
1 appearance
Naomi CallaCounsel
1 appearance

for William Blair, John Moreira and Wayne O’Riordan

Lisa CabelCounsel
1 appearance
Naomi CallaCounsel
1 appearance

on her own behalf

Katie ConnorSelf-represented
1 appearance

On her own behalf

Christine LongtinSelf-represented
1 appearance
Susan ShawSelf-represented
1 appearance
Manminder JagaitSelf-represented
1 appearance
Malika MounirSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kara FlanaganSelf-represented
1 appearance

On Her Own Behalf

Donna JennerSelf-represented
1 appearance
Joanne BlanchetteSelf-represented
1 appearance

On his own behalf

Raymond MortonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Frank QuattrociSelf-represented
1 appearance
Frank PaternoSelf-represented
1 appearance
Sona BaruaSelf-represented
1 appearance
Jason AndersonSelf-represented
1 appearance
John FlemingSelf-represented
1 appearance
Damola AlabiSelf-represented
1 appearance
Dawit TuquaboSelf-represented
1 appearance

On His Own Behalf

Raffaele (Ralph) CapocciSelf-represented
1 appearance
Sona BaruaSelf-represented
1 appearance
John LarkeSelf-represented
1 appearance
John FlemingSelf-represented
1 appearance

Representative

John VaccherAgent
1 appearance

Respondent

John FarantSelf-represented
1 appearance
Christine AshtonCounsel
1 appearance
Prabha HaranSelf-represented
1 appearance
Andrea DenovanCounsel
1 appearance

Respondent/Proposed Intervenor

Shaheen HiraniCounsel
1 appearance

Respondents

William S. CookCounsel
1 appearance

Self-represented

Kelly McNultySelf-represented
1 appearance
Mira FreidinSelf-represented
1 appearance
Leonardo GaluegoSelf-represented
1 appearance

567

Decisions

Years active

Tribunals

5.2

cases/mo

HRTO567(100%)

Decision types

motion

508

trial

Human Rights

Administrative Law

Employment and Labour Law

Other Tribunals

Landlord and Tenant

Bankruptcy and Insolvency Law

Workplace Safety and Insurance Law

Real Estate Law

Corporate/Commercial Law

Workers' Compensation

Ken Bhattacharjee

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

567

cases · 10 yrs · HRTO

Trial

Motion

Costs

Appeal

Sentencing

Vice-chair· 424Adjudicator· 94Vice-chair· 32Vice-Chair· 10Adjudicator· 7

Patricia G. Murray

35 cases1990–2017

Ken Bhattacharjee

Applicant ordered to release internal medical records to allow respondents to file a meaningful response.

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

Hamilton v. York Region District School Board, 2015 HRTO 1142

Ken Bhattacharjee

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

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

The respondent filed a response requesting early dismissal on the basis that the applicant had signed a full and final release.

The applicant failed to file submissions by the deadline.

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

Dolan v. Diageo Canada Inc., 2015 HRTO 1140

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 26, 2015

Human rights application dismissed as out of time because the nearly three-year delay was not incurred in good faith.

The applicant filed a human rights application nearly three years after the last alleged incident of discrimination, which related to his termination and a subsequent union grievance settlement.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because the application appeared to be outside the one-year limitation period under section 34(1) of the Human Rights Code.

The applicant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the delay.

The Tribunal found that the delay was not incurred in good faith and dismissed the application on a preliminary basis.

Shaw v. Bombardier Transportation, 2015 HRTO 1132

Ken Bhattacharjee

Human rights application dismissed at preliminary stage for failing to connect police conduct to Code grounds.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination by the police with respect to services based on race and ethnic origin.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because the application failed to explain how the alleged mistreatment was connected to a Code ground.

The applicant re-filed the same documents without addressing the Notice.

The Tribunal dismissed the application on a preliminary basis, finding it plain and obvious that the allegations were outside its jurisdiction as they were not connected to any Code grounds.

Voykin v. Ottawa Police, 2015 HRTO 1096

Pasqualino Di Monte

Ken Bhattacharjee

Practising Law - Employed17 cases2009–2015

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent Landlord and Tenant Board proceeding.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging housing discrimination and reprisal.

The respondent requested that the application be deferred pending the conclusion of an ongoing proceeding before the Landlord and Tenant Board involving the same facts.

The Tribunal granted the deferral to avoid duplication of evidence and the possibility of inconsistent findings of fact and law.

Zawadowski v. CBC Investments, 2015 HRTO 1090

Melissa Mark

Caroline (Nini) Jones

11 cases2009–2022

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 12, 2015

Human rights application dismissed under s. 45.1 as prior grievance settlement appropriately dealt with its substance.

The applicant, a teacher, filed a human rights application alleging gender-based harassment and discrimination by the respondent, her school principal.

The respondent requested that the application be dismissed under s. 45.1 of the Human Rights Code.

Rosalie Griffith v. Patrick Knight, 2015 HRTO 1075

Greg Bullen

50 cases2009–2019

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 10, 2015

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent WSIB appeal regarding benefit reduction.

The respondent requested that the Tribunal defer the application pending the conclusion of the applicant's ongoing appeal before the respondent's Appeal Branch.

The application was deferred.

McKee v. Workplace Safety and Insurance Board, 2015 HRTO 1059

Victoria Shen

Practising Law - Employed11 cases2010–2016

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 7, 2015

Tribunal grants uncontradicted request to add franchisor as respondent and reduce damages claimed.

The applicant filed an application alleging that the respondent franchisee discriminated against him on the basis of disability by using a discriminatory job application form.

The applicant brought a request for an order during the proceeding to amend the application to add the franchisor, Pet Valu Canada Inc., as a respondent, and to reduce the damages claimed.

The applicant alleged that the franchisor provided the standard form and directed its use.

As the request was uncontradicted, the Tribunal applied the test for adding a respondent and granted the amendments.

David Kergan v. Bark-er Pets Inc. and Pet Valu Canada Inc., 2015 HRTO 1057

Xiao Jin Chen

Not Practising Law - Employed1 case2015–2015

Shaheynoor Talukder

In Private Practice2 cases2015–2026

Allison Pyper

16 cases2014–2018

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 29, 2015

Human rights application alleging disability discrimination in employment dismissed for no reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant, a software developer with a physical disability, alleged that the respondent terminated his employment after one month because of his disability.

The respondent argued that the termination was due to performance issues and the cancellation of the project by its funder.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application had a reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's theory of discrimination was largely speculative and that there was no reasonable prospect he could prove a link between his termination and his disability.

The application was dismissed.

Abbasi v. Sygenics Inc., 2015 HRTO 1014

Peter Osborne

Andrew Porter

9 cases2015–2025

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 15, 2015

Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of concurrent proceeding before the HPARB.

The respondents requested to dismiss or defer the human rights application on the basis that the facts and issues were currently before the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board (HPARB).

The Tribunal found that deferral was the most fair, just, and expeditious way of proceeding, as concurrent proceedings dealing with the same issues raise the possibility of inconsistent decisions.

The application was deferred pending the conclusion of the HPARB proceeding.

Beverley Tingling v. College of Psychologists of Ontario, 2015 HRTO 933

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 14, 2015

Late adjournment request granted due to work conflict; next hearing date made peremptory.

The respondent requested an adjournment of the scheduled hearing due to an unavoidable work commitment involving an important audit.

The request was made more than 14 days after the Notice of Hearing was issued, requiring the respondent to demonstrate extraordinary circumstances under the Tribunal's Practice Direction.

The Tribunal granted the adjournment, finding that the respondent was caught between attending work and attending the hearing, but ordered that the next hearing date be peremptory to the respondent.

Jing An v. Xiaoyang Liu, 2015 HRTO 928

Ken Bhattacharjee

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

The applicant filed a human rights application which was deferred pending the conclusion of an ongoing Employment Standards proceeding.

The Tribunal subsequently requested an update on the status of the parallel proceeding and warned that failure to respond could result in dismissal for abandonment.

After the applicant and her representative failed to respond to multiple communications, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Augustin v. Platinum Electrical Contractors Inc., 2015 HRTO 889

Ken Bhattacharjee

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

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

She failed to attend a scheduled mediation session and did not communicate with the Tribunal to explain her absence.

The Tribunal sent a letter warning that failure to respond within ten days could result in the application being deemed abandoned.

The applicant did not respond.

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

Rampersaud v. Arden Holdings Inc., 2015 HRTO 888

Brian Silva

7 cases2013–2016

Ken Bhattacharjee

Human rights application dismissed under s. 45.1 as prior Employment Standards proceeding dealt with the substance.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging she was terminated from her employment as a nanny because of her pregnancy.

She had previously filed an Employment Standards claim regarding the same termination, which resulted in an award for lost wages and general damages.

The Tribunal held a preliminary hearing to determine whether the application should be dismissed under s. 45.1 of the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal found that the Employment Standards proceeding appropriately dealt with the substance of the application and that it would not be unfair to dismiss the application.

The application was dismissed to avoid relitigation of essentially the same dispute.

Smith v. Singh, 2015 HRTO 887

Erin Payne

Alexander Kowal

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 2, 2015

Human rights application alleging discrimination in hiring dismissed on preliminary basis for no reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application had a reasonable prospect of success.

The application was dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success.

Seyoum v. Evertz Microsystems Ltd., 2015 HRTO 883

Carmine Scalzi

2 cases2013–2015

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 25, 2015

Applicant's premature request for particulars and early document production denied prior to completion of pleadings.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging employment discrimination.

Before filing his Reply, the applicant requested an order for particulars and early production of documents from the respondent.

Bruno v. North York Chrysler Jeep Dodge Ram Fiat (“NYC”), 2015 HRTO 855

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 24, 2015

Application reactivated and preliminary hearing rescheduled following conclusion of related Court of Appeal proceeding.

The respondent requested that the application be reactivated following the conclusion of a related proceeding before the Ontario Court of Appeal.

The Tribunal ordered the application reactivated and directed the Registrar to reschedule the preliminary hearing.

Grace Ren v. College of Massage Therapists of Ontario, 2015 HRTO 848

Sharlene Ziniuk

Practising Law - Employed8 cases2011–2016

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 16, 2015

Second human rights application dismissed as abuse of process for re-litigating previously dismissed claims.

The applicant filed a second human rights application alleging discrimination based on sex regarding the enforcement of a child support order by the Family Responsibility Office.

The Tribunal had previously dismissed his first application on the same facts as out of time.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing and dismissed the second application as an abuse of process, finding it was an attempt to re-litigate the first application.

Ernst Goetze v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Community and Social Services (Family Responsibility Office), 2015 HRTO 796

Ken Bhattacharjee

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 12, 2015

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after neither party attended the scheduled hearing.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment.

A hearing was scheduled, but neither party attended or contacted the Tribunal to explain their absence.

The Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

Dobrolioubov v. Toro Aluminum Group of Companies, 2015 HRTO 786

Christine Ashton

In Private Practice8 cases2013–2023

Ken Bhattacharjee