Who is Naomi Overend?

Naomi Overend is a vice-chair at the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario with 975 decisions on record from 2008 to 2017. Key areas include human rights, administrative law, employment and labour law.

What tribunal does Naomi Overend sit on?

Naomi Overend sits on the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.

What areas of law does Naomi Overend decide?

Naomi Overend's most common areas include Human Rights (975 decisions), Administrative Law (286 decisions), Employment and Labour Law (257 decisions). Naomi Overend has handled 975 decisions across 10 areas.

How many decisions has Naomi Overend made?

Naomi Overend has 975 decisions on record from 2008 to 2017.

Who frequently appears before Naomi Overend?

Representatives who frequently appear before Naomi Overend include Self-represented, Doug Surh, Mary Eberts.

/Adjudicator

minicounsel

Naomi Overend — Vice-Chair

Human Rights

Administrative Law

Employment and Labour Law

Other Tribunals

Landlord and Tenant

Bankruptcy and Insolvency Law

Real Estate Law

Health Law

Workplace Safety and Insurance Law

Family and Matrimonial Law

Naomi Overend

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

975

cases · 10 yrs · HRTO

Trial

Motion

Costs

Appeal

Sentencing

Vice-chair· 792Vice-chair· 78Adjudicator· 71Vice-Chair· 13Adjudicator· 11Associate Chair (Acting)· 3Vice-chair· 1Acting Associate Chair· 1

Gregory Power

4 cases2012–2016

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 23, 2012

Request to re-activate deferred human rights application denied to avoid contradictory findings with concurrent WSIB proceedings.

The applicant sought to re-activate his human rights application, which had been deferred pending the conclusion of concurrent WSIB proceedings regarding his return to work following a workplace injury.

The applicant argued he was denied procedural fairness because he did not receive the full 14 days to respond to the respondents' original deferral request.

The Tribunal considered the request under Rule 14.5 but declined to re-activate the application, finding that proceeding concurrently with the WSIB appeal would create a real risk of contradictory findings regarding whether the proposed return-to-work duties were within the applicant's medical restrictions.

Celio Mateus v. Brock Restoration and Geoff Grist, 2012 HRTO 1436

Richelle Pollard

8 cases2012–2026

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 20, 2012

Tribunal declined to defer to civil action but requested submissions on whether section 34(11) barred the application.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging age discrimination and reprisal, while also having an ongoing Small Claims Court action seeking damages for injury to dignity.

The Tribunal declined to defer the application to the civil proceeding because the respondent took the position that the court lacked jurisdiction due to the applicant's union membership.

However, the Tribunal raised the issue of whether section 34(11) of the Human Rights Code barred the application entirely while the civil action remained active, and directed the parties to provide further written submissions on this jurisdictional issue.

Talos v. Grand Erie District School Board, 2012 HRTO 1426

Human rights application dismissed for delay as applicant failed to provide a good faith explanation.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability more than two years after his employment was terminated.

The Tribunal held a preliminary hearing to determine if the delay was incurred in good faith.

The applicant argued that language barriers prevented him from understanding his termination until much later.

The Tribunal rejected this explanation, noting the applicant had previously sought translation assistance from his uncle and had retained a paralegal for WSIB matters during the relevant period.

Finding no good faith explanation for the delay, the Tribunal dismissed the application.

Mohamud v. Morrison Lamothe Inc., 2012 HRTO 1405

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 16, 2012

Respondent granted 14-day extension to file Response to human rights application after missing initial deadline.

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

The respondent failed to file a Response by the deadline set in the Notice of Application.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision noting the failure to respond and warning of the consequences under Rule 5.5 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The respondent was granted an additional 14 days to file a Response and explain the delay, failing which the Tribunal may proceed without further notice.

McAllister v. By-de-Molen Co-operative Homes, 2012 HRTO 1392

Ronald G. Slaght

Not Practising Law61 cases1983–2020

Erik Turkienicz

1 case2012–2012

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 12, 2012

Request for production of internal investigation notes denied as not arguably relevant to pleaded allegations.

The applicant brought a Request for an Order During Proceeding for the production of an internal adjudicator's notes regarding other students investigated in the same incident.

The respondent opposed production on the basis of privacy and relevance.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's request was based on an allegation of differential treatment during the investigation, which was not pleaded in his Application.

As the documents were not arguably relevant to the issues raised in the pleadings, the request for production was denied.

Katz v. York University, 2012 HRTO 1379

Michael Zacks

2 cases2011–2012

Maryth Yachnin

4 cases2012–2017

Jo-Ann Seamon

28 cases2009–2023

Cathy Pike

55 cases2003–2016

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 11, 2012

Leave to intervene granted to four organizations regarding a section 45.1 dismissal issue.

Four organizations sought leave to intervene on the issue of whether the Tribunal should dismiss the application under section 45.1 of the Human Rights Code.

The requests were unopposed and deemed appropriate.

The Tribunal granted leave to intervene and directed the Registrar to schedule a teleconference to address evidence and the scope of intervention.

Maxwell v. Cooper-Standard Automotive Canada Limited, 2012 HRTO 1368

Gordon E. Wood

5 cases2003–2020

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 10, 2012

Human rights application deferred pending resolution of concurrent Landlord and Tenant Board proceedings regarding mould.

The applicant alleged discrimination with respect to the occupancy of accommodation because of disability and receipt of social assistance.

The applicant sought to amend his application to include monetary compensation for relocation costs, which the Tribunal granted on consent.

The Tribunal then considered whether to defer the application pending the resolution of concurrent proceedings before the Landlord and Tenant Board concerning mould in the applicant's apartment.

Finding a strong likelihood of duplication and inconsistent findings of fact, the Tribunal deferred the application.

Mohamed Elkhouli v. Ecuhome Corporation, 2012 HRTO 1342

Laura K. Williams

8 cases2001–2016

Glorie Alfred

Practising Law - Employed24 cases2010–2014

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 10, 2012

Requests to add 91 additional respondents to human rights applications denied for procedural defects and lack of reasons.

The applicants filed human rights applications alleging discrimination by a school principal and a daycare executive director.

They subsequently filed multiple requests to add a total of 91 additional individual respondents, including police officers, Children's Aid Society workers, and a journalist.

The Tribunal denied the requests, finding that the applicants failed to provide reasons for adding the individuals, failed to deliver the requests to the proposed respondents, and failed to provide contact information as required by the Tribunal's rules.

S.T. v. Paige, 2012 HRTO 1364

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 10, 2012

Human rights application dismissed as brother-in-law relationship does not fall within family status definition.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of family status, claiming he was terminated because his brother-in-law resigned from the respondent the week prior.

The Tribunal directed the applicant to provide submissions on jurisdiction, as the Code defines family status as a parent and child relationship.

The applicant failed to provide submissions.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the relationship between an individual and their brother-in-law does not fall within the statutory definition of family status.

David Duncan v. Kelseys 7060 Ltd, 2012 HRTO 1366

Lisa Kwasek

14 cases2009–2016

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 9, 2012

Individual respondents removed on consent; hearing scheduled to determine if application should be dismissed under s. 45.1.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination with respect to services because of disability.

The respondents requested that the application be dismissed under s. 45.1 of the Human Rights Code, arguing that the substance of the application was dealt with by an internal university appeal.

The respondents also requested the removal of individual respondents, to which the applicant consented.

The Tribunal ordered the removal of the individual respondents and scheduled a teleconference hearing to determine the s. 45.1 dismissal request.

Patricia Ann Naughton v. University of Western Ontario, 2012 HRTO 1357

Grant Bowers

34 cases1995–2014

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 5, 2012

Adjournment granted to allow applicant time to retain new counsel.

The applicant requested an adjournment of a preliminary hearing on delay because he was no longer represented by his previous counsel and needed time to retain new counsel.

The respondent objected but did not specify any prejudice.

The Tribunal granted a brief adjournment to allow the applicant time to retain new counsel, noting the lack of prejudice to the respondent.

Suraj Persad v. Toronto District School Board, 2012 HRTO 1338

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 29, 2012

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

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

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (NOID) on the basis that the application appeared to be outside its jurisdiction.

The applicant failed to respond to the NOID by the specified deadline.

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

Michael Rappaport v. Thomson Reuters Canada, 2012 HRTO 1301

Kerri Kitchura

21 cases2003–2016

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 29, 2012

Human rights application reactivated to schedule a hearing on whether a grievance arbitration dealt with its substance.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, which was previously deferred pending a grievance arbitration.

The respondent requested that the Tribunal dismiss the application under section 45.1 of the Human Rights Code, arguing the grievance proceeding appropriately dealt with the substance of the application.

The Tribunal reactivated the application and ordered a one-day in-person hearing to determine the section 45.1 dismissal request.

Harold Parris v. City of Toronto, 2012 HRTO 1304

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 27, 2012

Respondents given 10 days to file a Response to human rights application before proceeding undefended.

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

The respondents failed to file a Response by the deadline set in the Notice of Application.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision directing the respondents to file a Response within 10 days, failing which the Tribunal may proceed without further notice to them and deem them to have accepted the allegations.

Kenia Avendano v. Jacobson and Jacobson Mercantile Incorporated and Ken Georgopoulos, 2012 HRTO 1268

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 27, 2012

Personal respondent directed to file Response within 10 days or face consequences under Rule 5.5.

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

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

The Tribunal issued an interim decision directing the personal respondent to file a Response within 10 days, failing which the Tribunal may proceed without further notice and deem the respondent to have accepted the allegations.

Travis Alexander Blackman v. Universal Workers’ Union LIUNA Local 183 and Carlos Alayo, 2012 HRTO 1278

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 27, 2012

Respondents directed to file response within 10 days or face proceedings without further notice.

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

The respondents failed to file a response by the deadline set in the Notice of Application.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision directing the respondents to file a response within 10 days, along with an explanation for the delay, failing which the Tribunal may proceed without further notice to them.

Stella Layo v. Classic Amskor Mill, 2012 HRTO 1267

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 26, 2012

Human rights application dismissed as abandoned after applicant failed to provide requested submissions on jurisdiction.

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

The Tribunal requested written submissions from the applicant regarding its jurisdiction to proceed with the application, warning that failure to respond could result in dismissal.

The applicant failed to respond by the deadline.

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

Tanner Lee Alford v. Canadian National Railway, 2012 HRTO 1246

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 26, 2012

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.

After the hearing was rescheduled, an email sent on the applicant's behalf requested that the hearing and application be cancelled.

The Tribunal sought clarification on whether the applicant intended to withdraw the application or seek an adjournment, warning that failure to respond would result in deemed abandonment.

The applicant did not respond by the deadline.

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

Fry v. The Running Room Canada Inc., 2012 HRTO 1247

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 26, 2012

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

The applicant filed an application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, which was deferred pending the conclusion of an ongoing criminal proceeding.

The Tribunal subsequently wrote to the applicant requesting an update on the status of the criminal proceeding and warning that failure to respond could result in dismissal for abandonment.

The applicant failed to respond to the Tribunal's inquiry.

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

Francine Iokia v. The Regional Municipality of Peel Police Services Board, 2012 HRTO 1263

Naomi Overend

HRTO0 cases2008–2017

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 25, 2012

Request for interim remedy denied for failing to include a signed declaration and demonstrating necessity.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability regarding the respondents' attendance policy.

The applicant subsequently filed a Request for Interim Remedy.

The Tribunal denied the request because it was not supported by a signed declaration as required by Rule 23.3(b) of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure, and the applicant failed to demonstrate that an interim remedy was necessary to ensure a complete and effective remedy at the end of the hearing.

Thurtle v. William Osler Health Centre, 2012 HRTO 1240

Page 24 of 49 (975 cases)

Applicant

Chad McLeodSelf-represented
1 appearance
Christopher IyirhiaroSelf-represented
1 appearance
Daniel MuldoonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Doug SurhSelf-represented
1 appearance
Gabriel LandrySelf-represented
1 appearance
Marianne AmodeoSelf-represented
1 appearance
Meghan SimonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Mohammad ShabbeerSelf-represented
1 appearance
Patrice ChisholmSelf-represented
1 appearance
Sara SilverbergSelf-represented
1 appearance
Simon MalekSelf-represented
1 appearance
Timothy ThurtleSelf-represented
1 appearance
Vicki KellSelf-represented
1 appearance

Carillion Services Inc., Respondent

Dan ShieldsCounsel
1 appearance

Comstock Canada Ltd., Respondent

Madeleine L. S. LowenbergCounsel
1 appearance

corporate counsel for Crown Taxi Inc.

Stefanie Chin-YickCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel

Ann BurkeCounsel
1 appearance
Daryn JeffriesCounsel
1 appearance
Guy HunterCounsel
1 appearance
Jonathan DyeCounsel
1 appearance
Leonard MarvyCounsel
1 appearance
Paul MatthewsCounsel
1 appearance
Veronica KennyCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Applicant

Daniel A. LubinCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the City of Toronto

Robert FredericksCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Respondent

Glorie AlfredCounsel
1 appearance
Robert TaylorCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Respondents

William D. AndersonCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Toronto Professional Fire Fighters’ Association

James K. McDonaldCounsel
1 appearance

Crossby Dewar Inc., Respondent

Leah SimonCounsel
1 appearance

CUPE, Local 145, Intervenor

Susan BallantyneCounsel
1 appearance

for 1210670 Ontario Inc., Royal Taxi Inc., Beck Taxi Inc., Mohammed Bhatti, Associated Toronto Taxi-Cab Co-operative Ltd.

Carl W. PetersonCounsel
1 appearance

for Academic Women for Justice

Agnes WhitfieldAgent
1 appearance

for Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care and Heather Lisner-Kerbel

David ChondonCounsel
1 appearance

for Ellen Sue Mesbur

Clarke MelvilleCounsel
1 appearance

for Family and Children Services of Waterloo Region

Maura ThompsonCounsel
1 appearance

for Food for Life and Karen Bonham

Anthony BaluaraCounsel
1 appearance

for herself

Leon BartonSelf-represented
1 appearance

for herself, Ms. Germain and Marathon Pulp Inc.

Bobbi-Jo SchwantzSelf-represented
1 appearance

for himself

Alex GabrielSelf-represented
1 appearance
James BartonSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Kinark Child and Family Services

Sabatina VassalliCounsel
1 appearance

for Kingston Access Services

Trevor FrayAgent
2 appearances

for Loblaw Inc.

John O’ReillyCounsel
1 appearance

for Lorna Jack

Bob DickisonAgent
1 appearance

formerly for Crown Taxi Inc.

D. Russ MakepeaceCounsel
1 appearance

for Michael Burns

Dan CondonCounsel
1 appearance

for Michael McInnis and Constantina Tsilimigras

Jeffrey AndrewCounsel
1 appearance

for Peel Children’s Aid Society

Carole G. JenkinsCounsel
1 appearance

for P & H Foods, Respondent

Maureen BallCounsel
1 appearance

for Pizza Nova

Donna PolgarCounsel
1 appearance

for Presbyterian Church in Canada and Herb Gale

Stephen KendallAgent
1 appearance

for Primary Response Inc. and Meredith Cranswick

Tom FulfordAgent
1 appearance

for Richard Moon

Freya KristjansonCounsel
1 appearance

for St. Luke’s Church and Sheila Plant

Sheila PlantSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the affected party

Natasha UdellCounsel
1 appearance

for the Affected Party

Ryan GoldvineCounsel
1 appearance

for the applicant

Brenda CuthbertCounsel
1 appearance
Kingsley LaurinCounsel
1 appearance
Lina MiragliaSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Applicant

Self-representedSelf-represented
11 appearances
Doug SurhSelf-represented
6 appearances
Mary EbertsCounsel
5 appearances
Alexandre PapouchineSelf-represented
4 appearances
Arthur ZeilikmanCounsel
3 appearances
James LloySelf-represented
3 appearances
Laura PryseSelf-represented
3 appearances
Wasi KhanSelf-represented
3 appearances
Cecil NormanAgent
3 appearances
Eric MattisonSelf-represented
3 appearances
Hyun Whan KimSelf-represented
3 appearances
Michelle MulgraveCounsel
3 appearances
Guillermo FloresSelf-represented
2 appearances
Tara MyersSelf-represented
2 appearances
Nancy PolsinelliSelf-represented
2 appearances
Robert WeedenSelf-represented
2 appearances
Katherine LinSelf-represented
2 appearances
Ayoob KhanAgent
2 appearances
Caroline (Nini) JonesCounsel
2 appearances
Christine LongtinSelf-represented
2 appearances

for the Applicants

A.T.Agent
4 appearances
Cyndy HunterSelf-represented
2 appearances
Dan HunterSelf-represented
2 appearances
Kevin LiuSelf-represented
2 appearances
Elizabeth KeepSelf-represented
2 appearances
Grant DobsonSelf-represented
2 appearances
Judith ZhangSelf-represented
2 appearances
Self-representedSelf-represented
1 appearance
S.H.Self-represented
1 appearance
Shawn WestonAgent
1 appearance
Andriy KrykunenkoSelf-represented
1 appearance
C.M.Self-represented
1 appearance
C.R.Self-represented
1 appearance
E.L.Self-represented
1 appearance
Olga OleanovskiSelf-represented
1 appearance
Paula SeymourCounsel
1 appearance
S.B.Agent
1 appearance

for the Barrie Police Services Board

Glenn ChristieCounsel
1 appearance

for the City of Toronto

Rosanne GiuliettiCounsel
1 appearance

for the Complainant

Caroline V. (Nini) JonesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Complainants S. and W.

Cynthia WilkeyCounsel
1 appearance
Lesli BisgouldCounsel
1 appearance

for the Corporation of the City of Kingston

Sarah GareauCounsel
1 appearance

for the Human Rights Legal Support Centre, Intervenor

Jo-Ann SeamonCounsel
1 appearance

for the individual respondent Quinton Taylor

Cheryl HessCounsel
1 appearance

for the Industrial Accident Victims Group of Ontario, Intervenor

Maryth YachninCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor

Ryan GoldvineCounsel
2 appearances
Laurie KentCounsel
2 appearances
Katherine FerreiraCounsel
2 appearances
Paul O’RyanCounsel
2 appearances
Devon PaulCounsel
2 appearances
Jerrry RasoCounsel
1 appearance
Micheal KlugCounsel
1 appearance
Rebecca LeeCounsel
1 appearance
Richard LavertyUnion representative
1 appearance
Risa PancerCounsel
1 appearance
Sue LottCounsel
1 appearance
Tim ZayackUnion representative
1 appearance
Caroline JonesCounsel
1 appearance
Caroline V. (Nini) JonesCounsel
1 appearance
Dave SteeleCounsel
1 appearance
Gail MisraCounsel
1 appearance
Gavin LeebCounsel
1 appearance
Glenn WheelerAgent
1 appearance
Ian J. FellowsCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ministry of Children and Youth Services

Cheryl EllisonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ministry of the Attorney General

Anita LyonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Office of the Employer Advisor, Intervenor

Michael ZacksCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ontario Human Rights Commission

Cathy PikeCounsel
1 appearance
Christine ElwellCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ontario Human Rights Commission, Intervenor

Cathy PikeCounsel
1 appearance

for the respondent

Jinan KubursiCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent

Andrew ZabrovskyCounsel
4 appearances
Patricia G. MurrayCounsel
4 appearances
Marnie CorboldCounsel
3 appearances
Self-representedSelf-represented
3 appearances
Mark DiGirolamoCounsel
2 appearances
Adrian JakibchukCounsel
2 appearances
Lisa KwasekCounsel
2 appearances
Mathias LinkCounsel
2 appearances
Michelle HenryCounsel
2 appearances
Blair McCreadieCounsel
2 appearances
Grant BowersCounsel
2 appearances
Susan MunnCounsel
2 appearances
Paula DowAgent
2 appearances
Ronald G. SlaghtCounsel
2 appearances
Jane M. GoodingCounsel
2 appearances
W. Gordon SteinbergAgent
2 appearances
Madeleine LoewenbergCounsel
2 appearances
Patricia MatusiakCounsel
2 appearances
David GourlayCounsel
2 appearances
Evan Van DyckCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent 2185559 Ontario Inc.

Paul BursteinCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Alison Freeland

Laura StewartCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent BMO Field

David LedermanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Cheryl Paige

Glorie AlfredCounsel
3 appearances

for the Respondent Community Living Dufferin

Lisa CartyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Credit Valley Hospital

Kathyrn BirdCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Domain Registry Group Inc.

Alan BenloloAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Eugene Reid

Robert HealeyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ford Motor Company of Canada Limited

Anna AbbottCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Halton (Region)

Edward MillwardCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Independent Electricity System Operator

Richard CharneyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Marathon Pulp Inc.

Kevin D. MacNeillCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Mariposa Co-operative Homes

Charles SinclairCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Nimet Kara

Laura K. WilliamsCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services)

Indira SawhCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Richard Moon

Jo-Anne PickelCounsel
2 appearances
Freya KristjansonCounsel
1 appearance
Freya KritjansonCounsel
1 appearance
Amanda DarrachCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Royal Ottawa Health Care Group

Michelle O’BonsawinCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent(s)

Michael MacLellanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents

Heather CrispCounsel
2 appearances
Ann BurkeCounsel
2 appearances
Lisa RiegelCounsel
2 appearances
Antoni CasalinuovoCounsel
2 appearances
Gregory PowerCounsel
2 appearances
Terry HillCounsel
2 appearances
Greg BullenCounsel
2 appearances
Indira SawhCounsel
2 appearances
Marian LintonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Mark ArnoldCounsel
1 appearance
Mark MendlCounsel
1 appearance
Andrea KrywonisCounsel
1 appearance
Ann E. BurkeCounsel
1 appearance
Baaba ForsonCounsel
1 appearance
Bhavanaben PatelSelf-represented
1 appearance
Caitlin KavanaghAgent
1 appearance
Carl W. PetersonCounsel
1 appearance
Colin RaynerCounsel
1 appearance
Dana FullerCounsel
1 appearance
David A. GourlayCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Allan Rosenfeld, Matthew Burnstein, and Ridgeway Occupational Consultants Inc.

Mira NovekCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents and Intervenor CUPE Local 3083 and CUPE National

Paul O’RyanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Home Depot of Canada Inc. and Jessica Basken

Jonathan DyeCounsel
1 appearance

for the respondents in Applications 2009-03081-I, 2009-03083-I, 2009-03084-I and 2009-03086-I

Carl PetersonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Kap Chul Lee and Sun Hew Lee

John TealCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Office of the Independent Police Review Director and Gerry McNeilly

Lynette D’SouzaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Regional Municipality of Halton Police Services Board and Bill Marshall

Adam GuyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Toronto Police Services Board (2010-06416-I)

David A. GourlayCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Toronto Police Services Board (2010-07698-I) and Bradley Verspeeten (2010-04964-I)

Lisa C. CabelCounsel
4 appearances
Naomi CallaCounsel
2 appearances
Naomi E. CallaCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Toronto Police Services Board and Chris Dobbs (2010-06416-I)

David A. GourlayCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondents Toronto Police Services Board, Officer Ruttner and Officer Taylor

Michele WrightCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Subway Franchise Systems of Canada Ltd.

Peter DillonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Great West Life Assurance Company

Susan McCorquodaleCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Town of Fort Erie

Woodward B. McKaigCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Toronto Police Services Board (2010-04964-I)

Antonella CeddiaCounsel
4 appearances

for the Respondent Toronto Police Services Board (2010-06416-I)

David A. GourlayCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent University

Raj AnandCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent University of Windsor

Raj AnandCounsel
4 appearances

for the Toronto Police Association

Jessica DowlingCounsel
1 appearance
Tim ZayackUnion representative
1 appearance

for the Toronto Police Services Board and Chief William Blair

Kerri KitchuraCounsel
1 appearance

for the Toronto Transit Commission

Marni TolenskyCounsel
1 appearance

for the University of Windsor

Raj AnandCounsel
1 appearance

for the University of Windsor Faculty Association

James RenaudCounsel
1 appearance

for United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 175, Affected Party

Marcia BarryCounsel
1 appearance

for Women and the Law

Emir CrowneCounsel
1 appearance

LIUNA, Local 1059, Intervenor; Paul Coyne and Vernon Stoddart, Respondents

Lindsay LawrenceCounsel
1 appearance

Next Friend for the Applicants

A.T.Agent
1 appearance

On her own behalf

Kathie PassmoreSelf-represented
1 appearance
Marilynn MonnierSelf-represented
1 appearance
Rina Jade VanhelvoortSelf-represented
1 appearance

On his own behalf

Evgeny KopylovSelf-represented
1 appearance
John NearingSelf-represented
1 appearance
Legrand BertrandSelf-represented
1 appearance
Martin NyilasSelf-represented
1 appearance

Respondents

Indira SawhCounsel
1 appearance
Jody VilleneuveSelf-represented
1 appearance
J. Paul WearingCounsel
1 appearance
Kevin InwoodCounsel
1 appearance

Self-represented

Randall CharassSelf-represented
1 appearance
Richard ReidSelf-represented
1 appearance
Wazi KhanSelf-represented
1 appearance

Self-represented and Representative for John Buttigieg and Estate of Lorenza Buttigieg

Robert ButtigiegSelf-represented
1 appearance

William Osler Health Centre, Respondent

Andrew ShawCounsel
1 appearance

975

Decisions

Years active

Tribunals

8.9

cases/mo

HRTO975(100%)

Decision types

motion

937

trial

Page 24 of 49 (975 cases)

Gregory Power

Naomi Overend

Celio Mateus v. Brock Restoration and Geoff Grist, 2012 HRTO 1436

Richelle Pollard

Naomi Overend

Talos v. Grand Erie District School Board, 2012 HRTO 1426

Karen Sargeant

Hadiya Roderique

Naomi Overend

Mohamud v. Morrison Lamothe Inc., 2012 HRTO 1405

Naomi Overend

McAllister v. By-de-Molen Co-operative Homes, 2012 HRTO 1392

Ronald G. Slaght

Erik Turkienicz

Naomi Overend

Katz v. York University, 2012 HRTO 1379

Michael Zacks

Maryth Yachnin

Jo-Ann Seamon

Cathy Pike

Naomi Overend

Maxwell v. Cooper-Standard Automotive Canada Limited, 2012 HRTO 1368

Gordon E. Wood

Naomi Overend

Mohamed Elkhouli v. Ecuhome Corporation, 2012 HRTO 1342

Laura K. Williams

Glorie Alfred

Naomi Overend

S.T. v. Paige, 2012 HRTO 1364

Naomi Overend

David Duncan v. Kelseys 7060 Ltd, 2012 HRTO 1366

Lisa Kwasek

Naomi Overend

Patricia Ann Naughton v. University of Western Ontario, 2012 HRTO 1357

Grant Bowers

Naomi Overend

Suraj Persad v. Toronto District School Board, 2012 HRTO 1338

Naomi Overend

Michael Rappaport v. Thomson Reuters Canada, 2012 HRTO 1301

Kerri Kitchura

Naomi Overend

Harold Parris v. City of Toronto, 2012 HRTO 1304

Naomi Overend

Kenia Avendano v. Jacobson and Jacobson Mercantile Incorporated and Ken Georgopoulos, 2012 HRTO 1268

Naomi Overend

Travis Alexander Blackman v. Universal Workers’ Union LIUNA Local 183 and Carlos Alayo, 2012 HRTO 1278

Naomi Overend

Stella Layo v. Classic Amskor Mill, 2012 HRTO 1267

Naomi Overend

Tanner Lee Alford v. Canadian National Railway, 2012 HRTO 1246

Naomi Overend

Fry v. The Running Room Canada Inc., 2012 HRTO 1247

Naomi Overend

Francine Iokia v. The Regional Municipality of Peel Police Services Board, 2012 HRTO 1263

Naomi Overend

Thurtle v. William Osler Health Centre, 2012 HRTO 1240

Applicant

Carillion Services Inc., Respondent

Comstock Canada Ltd., Respondent

corporate counsel for Crown Taxi Inc.

Counsel

Counsel for the Applicant

Counsel for the City of Toronto

Counsel for the Respondent

Counsel for the Respondents

Counsel for the Toronto Professional Fire Fighters’ Association

Crossby Dewar Inc., Respondent

CUPE, Local 145, Intervenor

for 1210670 Ontario Inc., Royal Taxi Inc., Beck Taxi Inc., Mohammed Bhatti, Associated Toronto Taxi-Cab Co-operative Ltd.

for Academic Women for Justice

for Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care and Heather Lisner-Kerbel

for Ellen Sue Mesbur

for Family and Children Services of Waterloo Region

for Food for Life and Karen Bonham

for herself

for herself, Ms. Germain and Marathon Pulp Inc.

for himself

for Kinark Child and Family Services

for Kingston Access Services

for Loblaw Inc.