Sherry Liang

Application to be dismissed as abandoned if applicant fails to communicate by specified date.

The applicant filed an Application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code but later stated he wished to withdraw it.

He failed to file a Request to Withdraw or communicate further with the Tribunal.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision stating that the Application will be dismissed as abandoned if no communication is received by August 12, 2009.

Paul Ravenhill v. Humber College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning, 2009 HRTO 1208

Sherry Liang

Request to defer human rights application dismissed as moot after criminal charges were withdrawn.

The respondents requested that the human rights application be deferred pending the completion of criminal charges against the individual respondent.

The Tribunal was subsequently advised that the criminal charges had been withdrawn, rendering the deferral request moot.

The Tribunal ordered that the application proceed and scheduled mediation on the consent of the parties.

A.B. v. Joe Singer Shoes Limited, 2009 HRTO 1207

Sherry Liang

Human rights application stayed for up to one year pending criminal investigation into sexual harassment allegations.

The respondents requested a stay of the human rights application, which alleged sexual harassment, on the basis that there was an ongoing criminal investigation into the same allegations.

The respondents argued that compelling them to respond to the application would threaten their Charter rights.

The applicant did not respond to the request.

The Tribunal ordered that no further steps be taken in the application for up to one year, pending the completion of the police investigation.

Sabrina van Hoof v. 6205429 Canada Inc., Robert Skaf and Gaby Khoury, 2009 HRTO 1206

Sherry Liang

Request to expedite proceedings denied due to complexity of issues and unexplained delay in filing.

The applicant, a secondary school student, filed an application alleging discrimination on the basis of disability because the respondent school board refused to place her in her mother's special education class.

The applicant also filed a Request to Expedite Proceedings, seeking to have the matter resolved before the upcoming school year.

The Tribunal dismissed the request to expedite, finding that the issues were complex, had accumulated over time, and the applicant had delayed in filing the application without explanation.

Nye v. Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board, 2009 HRTO 1205

Sherry Liang

Respondent granted 10-day extension to file response to human rights application or face default proceedings.

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

The respondent failed to file a response within the required 35-day period.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision warning the respondent of the consequences of failing to participate under Rule 5.5 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The respondent was granted 10 days to file a response along with an explanation for the delay, failing which the Tribunal may proceed without further notice.

Songyang Hu v. The Wardens of Camp 1, 2009 HRTO 1204

Sherry Liang

Application withdrawn with leave of the Tribunal.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw the application filed under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The respondent made no submissions.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

Hiroshi Noda v. Huron-Perth Children’s Aid Society, 2009 HRTO 1203

Sherry Liang

Request to expedite human rights application denied as circumstances did not meet urgency threshold.

The applicant filed a Request to Expedite her human rights application alleging employment discrimination, citing fear of ongoing difficulties with her employer and financial strain from reduced hours.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the alleged harm did not constitute truly urgent circumstances requiring priority over other matters under the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

Donna Wamsley v. 1509611 Ontario Inc. o/a Ed Green Blueprinting, a Division of Wade Tech, 2009 HRTO 1200

Sherry Liang

Interim requests to add respondents and order inquiries regarding a deceased tenant's estate and burial dismissed.

The applicant, alleging he was the same-sex common-law partner of a deceased tenant, filed a human rights application against the housing provider and the deceased's mother.

He brought several interim requests for orders, including adding the City of Ottawa, a funeral home, and a cemetery as respondents, sealing a safety deposit box, and ordering an inquiry into the deceased's finances.

The Tribunal dismissed all interim requests, finding they related to estate distribution and burial arrangements outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction under the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal also directed the applicant to provide submissions on why his claim against the deceased's mother falls within its jurisdiction.

Patterson v. Ottawa Community Housing Corporation, 2009 HRTO 1033

Sherry Liang

In Private Practice102 cases1984–2025

Human rights application deferred pending completion of concurrent union grievance proceeding.

The applicant filed an application under the Human Rights Code while a concurrent union grievance proceeding based on the same facts was ongoing.

The respondents requested that the application be deferred pending the completion of the grievance process.

The Tribunal noted its normal approach is to defer to concurrent proceedings where there is substantial overlap in facts and human rights issues, as grievance arbitrators have the authority to enforce human rights obligations.

Finding no reason to depart from this approach, the Tribunal deferred the application pending the conclusion of the grievance process.

Daniel Parsons v. The Regional Municipality of York, Tony Pulla, David Owen and Joseph Petrungaro, 2009 HRTO 1031

Howard Goldblatt

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 8, 2009

Human rights application against union dismissed for failing to establish prima facie case of disability discrimination.

The applicant, a firefighter, alleged that his union and several of its officials discriminated against him on the basis of disability by failing to adequately represent him in his employment relations with the City of Mississauga following a workplace injury.

After hearing the applicant's evidence, the respondents moved to dismiss the application for failing to establish a prima facie case.

The Tribunal granted the motion and dismissed the application, finding no evidence that the union treated the applicant unequally or based its representation decisions on discriminatory considerations.

Traversy v. Mississauga Professional Firefighters’ Association, 2009 HRTO 996

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 6, 2009

Human rights application deferred pending completion of concurrent union grievance arbitration on same facts.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging employment discrimination on the basis of race, gender, and ethnic origin.

The applicant also had an ongoing union grievance proceeding based on substantially the same facts.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer.

After initially opposing, the applicant consented to the deferral.

The Tribunal deferred the application pending the completion of the grievance arbitration, noting that grievance arbitrators have the authority to decide human rights claims.

Blackman v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2009 HRTO 970

Sherry Liang

Practising Law - Employed21 cases2009–2023

Tribunal refuses to defer human rights application to condominium arbitration due to uncertain jurisdiction.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging that the condominium corporation's declaration, which restricts units to single-family residences, discriminates against her tenants based on age, family status, and marital status.

The respondents requested that the Tribunal defer the application pending the completion of arbitration proceedings under the Condominium Act.

The Tribunal declined to defer the application, finding it unclear whether an arbitrator appointed under the Condominium Act has the authority to consider and apply the Human Rights Code to resolve the dispute.

Howard v. Halton Condominium Corporation No. 59, 2009 HRTO 966

James K. McDonald

34 cases1984–2024

Garry J. Wise

1 case2009–2009

Amandi Esonwanne

Sherry Liang

Tribunal refused to defer application to arbitration where union declined to advance human rights claims.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and failure to accommodate by his employer.

The employer sought to defer the application pending the outcome of concurrent grievance arbitration proceedings.

The union, which had carriage of the grievances, indicated it would not advance the human rights claims at arbitration.

The Tribunal declined to defer the application, finding that because the human rights issues would not be adjudicated in the grievance process, deferral was not appropriate.

Leblanc v. Toronto (City), 2009 HRTO 960

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 29, 2009

Reconsideration of interim decision denying complaint amendment denied for failing to meet Rule 102 criteria.

The complainant requested reconsideration of an interim decision that denied her request to amend her human rights complaint to include allegations regarding her detention under the Mental Health Act.

The Tribunal reviewed the request under Rule 102 of its Rules of Practice and found no new facts, no conflict with established jurisprudence, and no other factors outweighing the public interest in finality.

The request for reconsideration was denied.

Jemila Macanovic v. Toronto Police Services Board, 2009 HRTO 930

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 26, 2009

Applicant directed to clarify proposed amendments to human rights application.

The applicant filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings seeking to amend her human rights application, alleging that she was fired and her Record of Employment incorrectly stated she quit.

The Tribunal found the request unclear and directed the applicant to clarify the specific amendments sought, including whether she was alleging additional acts of discrimination or seeking additional remedies, within two weeks.

Maurer v. Metroland Media Group, 2009 HRTO 924

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 25, 2009

Personal respondent removed from human rights application; hearing scheduled for early dismissal request.

The respondent union requested the removal of a personal respondent and the early dismissal of the application.

The applicant alleged that the union and its employee discriminated against her on the basis of disability by failing to properly advocate for her accommodation with her employer, leading her to sign a settlement.

Applying the Persaud factors, the Tribunal removed the personal respondent, noting the union did not dispute vicarious liability and no prejudice would result.

The Tribunal scheduled a half-day oral hearing to address the request for early dismissal.

Holowka v. Ontario Nurses’ Association, 2009 HRTO 915

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 22, 2009

Request to remove individual as a respondent granted on consent.

The respondent Patrice Barry filed a Request for an Order during Proceedings seeking to be removed as a respondent to the human rights complaint.

As the other parties consented to the request, the Tribunal ordered that Patrice Barry be removed as a respondent and amended the style of cause accordingly.

Prem Kumar v. Ontario (Transportation), 2009 HRTO 898

Sherry Liang

Corporate respondent ordered to produce the address of a taxi driver under Rule 1.7(p).

In an interim decision, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario ordered the corporate respondent to provide the current or most recent address of a specific taxi driver.

The corporate respondent had previously indicated it possessed no written or electronic records of the trip in question but identified the driver of Taxi 173.

Pursuant to Rule 1.7(p) of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure, the Tribunal directed the production of the driver's address to facilitate the fair, just, and expeditious resolution of the matter.

Bosscarino Antwi v. 1281871 Ontario Inc. o/a Brampton Bramalea Kwik Kab and Bir Singh, 2009 HRTO 867

Sherry Liang

Employment and Labour Law

Human rights application withdrawn with consent of the respondent and leave of the Tribunal.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw their human rights application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, pursuant to Rule 10 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The respondent consented to the withdrawal.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

Zvonmir Basic v. Wynn Family Properties, 2009 HRTO 863

Applicant

Zvonimir BasicSelf-represented
1 appearance
Keyvan NourhaghighiSelf-represented
1 appearance

Counsel

Leola PonCounsel
1 appearance
Marnie BacherCounsel
1 appearance
Sarah EvesCounsel
1 appearance
Michael TorrenceCounsel
1 appearance
Grant BowersCounsel
1 appearance
Cathy PikeCounsel
1 appearance
Kate HughesCounsel
1 appearance
Mandy WojcikCounsel
1 appearance
Jill Van VugtCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for Corporate Respondent and Personal Respondent

Steven WilliamsCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for Ontario Human Rights Commission

Brian SmithCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for Queen’s University

Ashley BrownCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Affected Party

Melany V. FranklinCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Commission

Sharon AbrahamsCounsel
2 appearances
Kikee MalikCounsel
1 appearance
Sharon Ffolkes-AbrahamsCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Intervenor

David ButtCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Respondent

Robert J. BaldwinCounsel
2 appearances
Kate WatersCounsel
1 appearance
Brenda BowlbyCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Respondents

Frances S. BrennanCounsel
1 appearance
Grant BowersCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Respondent The Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Transportation

Jennifer RichardsCounsel
1 appearance

for Casino Rama Services, Aaron Johnston, Valerie Spurgeon, Debra Pratt, Sandy Emms, Stacey Beaver, Steven Chase

Donna D’AndreaCounsel
1 appearance

for Claybrooke Inc. and Claybrooke Marketing Inc.

Ian HarveyAgent
1 appearance

for Durham Catholic District School Board, Andy J. Fedak and Susan Duane

Dolores BarbiniCounsel
1 appearance

for Durham Regional Police Service and Police Constable Foote

Sheila SchweizerCounsel
1 appearance

for Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario and proposed respondents

Sarah WrightCounsel
1 appearance
Robin BasuCounsel
1 appearance
Bruce EllisCounsel
1 appearance

for Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Attorney General (observer)

Vanessa GlasserAgent
1 appearance

for Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Children and Youth Services

Anna RaimondoCounsel
1 appearance

for Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario, as represented by the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care

Matthew HornerCounsel
1 appearance

for herself

Catherine VelkersSelf-represented
1 appearance
Coralie JudahSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Kofi Aboagye

Coralie JudahAgent
1 appearance

for Pinecrest-Queensway Community Health Centre, Alejandra Dubois and Sue Horrocks

John Paul ZubecCounsel
1 appearance

for the Appellants

Self-representedSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the applicant

Bill PetrieUnion representative
1 appearance
Margaret LeightonCounsel
1 appearance
Gloria RowsellAgent
1 appearance
L. A. RichmondCounsel
1 appearance
Frances SobodaUnion representative
1 appearance

for the Applicant

Achille John RuffoloSelf-represented
4 appearances
Zvonimir BasicSelf-represented
4 appearances
Gloria RamnathSelf-represented
3 appearances
Richard MillerCounsel
3 appearances
Glen MorrisonAgent
2 appearances
Pierre MercierAgent
2 appearances
Nacon DiobaSelf-represented
2 appearances
Yvette LemieuxSelf-represented
2 appearances
Raj PannuSelf-represented
2 appearances
Jeff WilsonSelf-represented
2 appearances
Jason KranzSelf-represented
2 appearances
Elizabeth MaurerSelf-represented
2 appearances
Elle VenholaCounsel
2 appearances
Susan WatersSelf-represented
2 appearances
Tai NguyenSelf-represented
2 appearances
Ebaita OkunboSelf-represented
2 appearances
Self-representedSelf-represented
2 appearances
Mukesh ChopraSelf-represented
2 appearances
Juliet L. KnaptonCounsel
2 appearances
Phillip PattersonSelf-represented
2 appearances

for the Applicant/Claimants

Kate StephensonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Applicants

Karen McArthurCounsel
1 appearance
Self-representedSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the College

Bernard C. LeBlancCounsel
3 appearances
Debra McKennaCounsel
2 appearances
Emily GrahamCounsel
2 appearances
Justine WongCounsel
2 appearances
Kenzie BuntingCounsel
2 appearances
Ahmad MozaffariCounsel
2 appearances
Joanna BirenbaumCounsel
2 appearances
Amanda ByrdCounsel
1 appearance
Renée KoppCounsel
1 appearance
Victoria CistroneCounsel
1 appearance
Enniael StairCounsel
1 appearance
Carly WaisglassCounsel
1 appearance
Elisabeth WidnerCounsel
1 appearance
Bernard LeBlancCounsel
1 appearance

for the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario

Michelle GibbsCounsel
1 appearance

for the Commission

Raj DhirCounsel
2 appearances
Sharon Ffolkes-AbrahamsCounsel
1 appearance
Sheena ScottCounsel
1 appearance
Yavar HameedCounsel
1 appearance
Christine ElwellCounsel
1 appearance
Christine EllwellCounsel
1 appearance
Anthony D. GriffinCounsel
1 appearance
Megan Evans MaxwellCounsel
1 appearance

for the complainant

Marinac-JafferAgent
1 appearance

for the Complainant

Robert DavisSelf-represented
3 appearances
J.L.C.Self-represented
1 appearance
Jacqueline Lewis-CampbellAgent
1 appearance
Fran Marinic-JafferAgent
1 appearance
Russell JarvisSelf-represented
1 appearance
Michelle DavidsonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Jacques PerronSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Complainant Andy Carson

Paula Soares-CarsonAgent
1 appearance

for the Complainant Dylan Sigrist

Lori SigristAgent
1 appearance

for the COSTI Corvetti Centre, COSTI Board and two individual respondents

Marnie BaizleyCounsel
1 appearance

for the COSTI Corvetti Centre, COSTI Board and two individual respondents (observer)

Marnie BaizleyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Employer

Susan MunnCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervener

Howard GoldblattCounsel
1 appearance

for the Intervenor

Teresa GianfeliceCounsel
1 appearance
Carolyn HartCounsel
1 appearance
James K. McDonaldCounsel
1 appearance
Jane GoodingCounsel
1 appearance
Mark WrightCounsel
1 appearance

for the London District Catholic School Board and individual respondents

Melanie WarnerCounsel
1 appearance
Eric RoherCounsel
1 appearance

for the Ontario Human Rights Commission

Sharon Ffolkes AbrahamsCounsel
1 appearance
Kikee MalikCounsel
1 appearance
Raj DhirCounsel
1 appearance

for the proposed Respondent

Bruce EllisCounsel
1 appearance

for the registrant

Andrew McKennaCounsel
2 appearances
Ruba El-SayeghCounsel
1 appearance
Nabiel DawoodCounsel
1 appearance
Reema ZaiaCounsel
1 appearance
Alexa Banister-ThompsonCounsel
1 appearance
Crystal GillisCounsel
1 appearance
Reem ZaiaCounsel
1 appearance
Wudassie TamratCounsel
1 appearance
Niiti SimmondsCounsel
1 appearance
Carina LentschCounsel
1 appearance
Melissa PradaCounsel
1 appearance
Jennifer McKendryCounsel
1 appearance
Charles PainterCounsel
1 appearance
Mario DelgadoCounsel
1 appearance
Sahar AliCounsel
1 appearance

for the Registrant

Noah MugenyiSelf-represented
1 appearance
Nidal SaloumSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the respondent

Christina JonasAgent
1 appearance
Allan R. WeirAgent
1 appearance
Jon C. ButlerAgent
1 appearance
F. G. HamiltonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent

Gurjit BrarCounsel
3 appearances
Beata KratiukSelf-represented
2 appearances
Brenda BowlbyCounsel
2 appearances
R. Paul MarshallCounsel
2 appearances
Darragh MeagherCounsel
2 appearances
Robert DunfordCounsel
1 appearance
Michael S. RichardsCounsel
1 appearance
Colin JohnstonCounsel
1 appearance
Jennifer BirrellCounsel
1 appearance
Jonathan DyeCounsel
1 appearance
Mark ZegaCounsel
1 appearance
Richard CampbellCounsel
1 appearance
Gordon WeirCounsel
1 appearance
Self-representedSelf-represented
1 appearance
Paula RuzakCounsel
1 appearance
David PickwoadCounsel
1 appearance
Claudia VicencioCounsel
1 appearance
Amandi EsonwanneCounsel
1 appearance
Dana McDonaldCounsel
1 appearance
Brenda GloverCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent, 481039 Ontario Ltd.

Evelyn LibrachAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Andy Gidwani

Meredith JonesCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent BAPS

Andrew PintoCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 3902

Richard BlairCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent City of Toronto

Ansuya PachaiCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario

Mark WrightCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent Expertech Network Installation Inc.

Susan CrawfordCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Metroland Media Group Inc.

Jason GreenCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Metroland Media Group Inc. c.o.b. as The Hamilton Spectator

Jason GreenCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ontario Labour Relations Board

Lisa AminAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondent Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation

Susan UrselCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Patrice Barry

Chris TonksCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Peel District School Board

Roy C. FilionCounsel
2 appearances

for the Respondent Royal Health Care Centre

Dr. Kari EdmanAgent
1 appearance
Dr. Felix KlajnerAgent
1 appearance

for the Respondents

Donald G. KiddCounsel
4 appearances
Roy FilionCounsel
3 appearances
Grant BowersCounsel
2 appearances
Craig Vander ZeeCounsel
2 appearances
Ann DinnertCounsel
2 appearances
Elizabeth KeenanCounsel
1 appearance
Michael MartoshCounsel
1 appearance
Gita AnandCounsel
1 appearance
Heather McIvorCounsel
1 appearance
Melanie A. WarnerCounsel
1 appearance
Matthew CarrollCounsel
1 appearance
Howard GoldblattCounsel
1 appearance
Glorie AlfredCounsel
1 appearance
UnknownCounsel
1 appearance
Ida MartinCounsel
1 appearance
Rocky ValentiniSelf-represented
1 appearance
Ken StuebingCounsel
1 appearance
Melanie WarnerCounsel
1 appearance
David PatacairkCounsel
1 appearance
Gina Saccaccio BrannanCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Communications, Energy and Paperworkers’ Union of Canada, Local 87-M and Paul Morse

Mandy WojcikCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Communications, Energy and Paperworkers’ Union of Canada, Local 87-M (Southern Ontario Newsmedia Guild) and Paul Morse

Mandy WojcikCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents English District Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, David Stechholz, and Jeffrey Miskus

Evan VanDykCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Health and Long Term Care, the Minister of Labour, the Minister of the Attorney General, and Ontario Human Rights Commission

Lisa AminCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents Le Conseil Scolaire de District Catholique Des Aurores Boréales and Roger Lepage

Kevin D. MacNeillCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondents The Governing Council of the University of Toronto, James Dicenso and John Kloppenborg

Catherine PetersCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent The Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Transportation

George ParrisCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Workplace Safety and Insurance Board

Gurjit BrarCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent York Region District School Board

Angela E. RaeCounsel
1 appearance

for the Respondent Yvonne Monto

Jeff RooneyAgent
1 appearance

for the Toronto Catholic District School Board and six individual respondents

Amy R. TibbleCounsel
2 appearances

for the Toronto Police Association

David ButtCounsel
1 appearance

for the Toronto Police Services Board

Robert J. BaldwinCounsel
1 appearance

for the Union

Robin GordonUnion representative
1 appearance

for William Blair, Chief of Police

Sie-Wing KhowCounsel
1 appearance

On behalf of the Elementary Teachers of Toronto

Martin LongUnion representative
1 appearance

On her own behalf

Jemila MacanovicSelf-represented
2 appearances
Michelle DavidsonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Susan WatersSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kimberley McHughSelf-represented
1 appearance
Lise D. PerthSelf-represented
1 appearance
Adèle MercierSelf-represented
1 appearance

On Her Own Behalf

Elizabeth MaurerSelf-represented
1 appearance
Jemila MacanovicSelf-represented
1 appearance

on his own behalf

Juan SolerSelf-represented
1 appearance

On his own behalf

Alain MartelSelf-represented
1 appearance
Prem KumarSelf-represented
1 appearance
John StansensSelf-represented
1 appearance
David YoungSelf-represented
1 appearance
John CvitkoSelf-represented
1 appearance
Don McDonaldSelf-represented
1 appearance

self-represented

Weifang ZhangSelf-represented
1 appearance
Aaron ShadSelf-represented
1 appearance

577

Decisions

Years active

Tribunals

1.4

cases/mo

HRTO543(94%)

IPCO12(2%)

OMTDT5(1%)

OPSDT4(1%)

ORPDT3(1%)

OCASPD3(1%)

OCPDT2(0%)

OPDT2(0%)

OGSB1(0%)

OASLPDT1(0%)

OLRB1(0%)

Decision types

motion

527

trial

appeal

costs

/Adjudicator

Sherry Liang — panel chair

Human Rights

Administrative Law

Other Tribunals

Health Law

Workplace Safety and Insurance Law

Landlord and Tenant

Real Estate Law

Bankruptcy and Insolvency Law

Workers' Compensation

Sherry Liang

panel chair·College of Audiologists and Speech-Language Pathologists of Ontario·Since 1992

OCASPD OPDT OMTDT ORPDT OCPDT OASLPDT OPSDT HRTO IPCO OLRB OGSB

577

cases · 35 yrs · HRTO, IPCO, OMTDT, OPSDT, ORPDT, OCASPD, OCPDT, OPDT, OGSB, OASLPDT, OLRB

Trial

Motion

Costs

Appeal

Sentencing

Vice-chair· 417Vice-chair· 61Adjudicator· 39Vice-Chair· 17panel chair· Chair· 17Adjudicator· 14Vice Chair· 5panel chair· 3

Mandy Wojcik

36 cases2009–2023

Jason Green

15 cases2006–2014

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioAug 6, 2009

Tribunal directed respondents to respond to applicant's request to amend application to add reprisal claim.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging sexual harassment by a co-worker and failure to respond by her employer and union.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's materials sufficiently identified the basis for her request to amend and directed the respondents to file their responses to the request.

Maurer v. Metroland Media Group, 2009 HRTO 1221

Sherry Liang

Application to be dismissed as abandoned if applicant fails to communicate by specified date.

The applicant filed an Application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code but later stated he wished to withdraw it.

He failed to file a Request to Withdraw or communicate further with the Tribunal.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision stating that the Application will be dismissed as abandoned if no communication is received by August 12, 2009.

Paul Ravenhill v. Humber College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning, 2009 HRTO 1208

Sherry Liang

Request to defer human rights application dismissed as moot after criminal charges were withdrawn.

The respondents requested that the human rights application be deferred pending the completion of criminal charges against the individual respondent.

The Tribunal was subsequently advised that the criminal charges had been withdrawn, rendering the deferral request moot.

The Tribunal ordered that the application proceed and scheduled mediation on the consent of the parties.

A.B. v. Joe Singer Shoes Limited, 2009 HRTO 1207

Sherry Liang

Human rights application stayed for up to one year pending criminal investigation into sexual harassment allegations.

The respondents requested a stay of the human rights application, which alleged sexual harassment, on the basis that there was an ongoing criminal investigation into the same allegations.

The respondents argued that compelling them to respond to the application would threaten their Charter rights.

The applicant did not respond to the request.

The Tribunal ordered that no further steps be taken in the application for up to one year, pending the completion of the police investigation.

Sabrina van Hoof v. 6205429 Canada Inc., Robert Skaf and Gaby Khoury, 2009 HRTO 1206

Sherry Liang

Request to expedite proceedings denied due to complexity of issues and unexplained delay in filing.

The applicant also filed a Request to Expedite Proceedings, seeking to have the matter resolved before the upcoming school year.

The Tribunal dismissed the request to expedite, finding that the issues were complex, had accumulated over time, and the applicant had delayed in filing the application without explanation.

Nye v. Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board, 2009 HRTO 1205

Sherry Liang

Respondent granted 10-day extension to file response to human rights application or face default proceedings.

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

The respondent failed to file a response within the required 35-day period.

The Tribunal issued an interim decision warning the respondent of the consequences of failing to participate under Rule 5.5 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The respondent was granted 10 days to file a response along with an explanation for the delay, failing which the Tribunal may proceed without further notice.

Songyang Hu v. The Wardens of Camp 1, 2009 HRTO 1204

Sherry Liang

Application withdrawn with leave of the Tribunal.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw the application filed under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The respondent made no submissions.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

Hiroshi Noda v. Huron-Perth Children’s Aid Society, 2009 HRTO 1203

Sherry Liang

Request to expedite human rights application denied as circumstances did not meet urgency threshold.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the alleged harm did not constitute truly urgent circumstances requiring priority over other matters under the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

Donna Wamsley v. 1509611 Ontario Inc. o/a Ed Green Blueprinting, a Division of Wade Tech, 2009 HRTO 1200

Sherry Liang

Interim requests to add respondents and order inquiries regarding a deceased tenant's estate and burial dismissed.

The applicant, alleging he was the same-sex common-law partner of a deceased tenant, filed a human rights application against the housing provider and the deceased's mother.

The Tribunal dismissed all interim requests, finding they related to estate distribution and burial arrangements outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction under the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal also directed the applicant to provide submissions on why his claim against the deceased's mother falls within its jurisdiction.

Patterson v. Ottawa Community Housing Corporation, 2009 HRTO 1033

Sherry Liang

In Private Practice102 cases1984–2025

Human rights application deferred pending completion of concurrent union grievance proceeding.

The applicant filed an application under the Human Rights Code while a concurrent union grievance proceeding based on the same facts was ongoing.

The respondents requested that the application be deferred pending the completion of the grievance process.

Finding no reason to depart from this approach, the Tribunal deferred the application pending the conclusion of the grievance process.

Daniel Parsons v. The Regional Municipality of York, Tony Pulla, David Owen and Joseph Petrungaro, 2009 HRTO 1031

Howard Goldblatt

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 8, 2009

Human rights application against union dismissed for failing to establish prima facie case of disability discrimination.

After hearing the applicant's evidence, the respondents moved to dismiss the application for failing to establish a prima facie case.

Traversy v. Mississauga Professional Firefighters’ Association, 2009 HRTO 996

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJul 6, 2009

Human rights application deferred pending completion of concurrent union grievance arbitration on same facts.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging employment discrimination on the basis of race, gender, and ethnic origin.

The applicant also had an ongoing union grievance proceeding based on substantially the same facts.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer.

After initially opposing, the applicant consented to the deferral.

The Tribunal deferred the application pending the completion of the grievance arbitration, noting that grievance arbitrators have the authority to decide human rights claims.

Blackman v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2009 HRTO 970

Sherry Liang

Practising Law - Employed21 cases2009–2023

Tribunal refuses to defer human rights application to condominium arbitration due to uncertain jurisdiction.

The respondents requested that the Tribunal defer the application pending the completion of arbitration proceedings under the Condominium Act.

Howard v. Halton Condominium Corporation No. 59, 2009 HRTO 966

James K. McDonald

34 cases1984–2024

Garry J. Wise

1 case2009–2009

Amandi Esonwanne

Sherry Liang

Tribunal refused to defer application to arbitration where union declined to advance human rights claims.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and failure to accommodate by his employer.

The employer sought to defer the application pending the outcome of concurrent grievance arbitration proceedings.

The union, which had carriage of the grievances, indicated it would not advance the human rights claims at arbitration.

The Tribunal declined to defer the application, finding that because the human rights issues would not be adjudicated in the grievance process, deferral was not appropriate.

Leblanc v. Toronto (City), 2009 HRTO 960

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 29, 2009

Reconsideration of interim decision denying complaint amendment denied for failing to meet Rule 102 criteria.

The request for reconsideration was denied.

Jemila Macanovic v. Toronto Police Services Board, 2009 HRTO 930

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 26, 2009

Applicant directed to clarify proposed amendments to human rights application.

The applicant filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings seeking to amend her human rights application, alleging that she was fired and her Record of Employment incorrectly stated she quit.

Maurer v. Metroland Media Group, 2009 HRTO 924

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 25, 2009

Personal respondent removed from human rights application; hearing scheduled for early dismissal request.

The respondent union requested the removal of a personal respondent and the early dismissal of the application.

Applying the Persaud factors, the Tribunal removed the personal respondent, noting the union did not dispute vicarious liability and no prejudice would result.

The Tribunal scheduled a half-day oral hearing to address the request for early dismissal.

Holowka v. Ontario Nurses’ Association, 2009 HRTO 915

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioJun 22, 2009

Request to remove individual as a respondent granted on consent.

The respondent Patrice Barry filed a Request for an Order during Proceedings seeking to be removed as a respondent to the human rights complaint.

As the other parties consented to the request, the Tribunal ordered that Patrice Barry be removed as a respondent and amended the style of cause accordingly.

Prem Kumar v. Ontario (Transportation), 2009 HRTO 898

Sherry Liang

Corporate respondent ordered to produce the address of a taxi driver under Rule 1.7(p).

In an interim decision, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario ordered the corporate respondent to provide the current or most recent address of a specific taxi driver.

The corporate respondent had previously indicated it possessed no written or electronic records of the trip in question but identified the driver of Taxi 173.

Pursuant to Rule 1.7(p) of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure, the Tribunal directed the production of the driver's address to facilitate the fair, just, and expeditious resolution of the matter.

Bosscarino Antwi v. 1281871 Ontario Inc. o/a Brampton Bramalea Kwik Kab and Bir Singh, 2009 HRTO 867

Sherry Liang