Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 13, 2009

Human rights application deferred pending completion of related WSIB proceedings.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the ground of disability following a workplace injury.

The applicant requested that the application be deferred pending the completion of related proceedings at the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB).

As the respondents did not object, the Tribunal granted the request and deferred the application.

Gibson v. Arc Resources Canada, 2009 HRTO 624

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 12, 2009

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

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

The respondents requested that the application be deferred because the facts were part of an ongoing grievance process referred to arbitration by the applicant's union.

The Tribunal found no reason to depart from its usual approach of deferring applications where there is an ongoing grievance based on the same facts and issues.

The application was deferred pending the conclusion of the grievance.

Catherine Cloutier v. Upper Canada District School Board, 2009 HRTO 616

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 11, 2009

Request to expedite denied and human rights application deferred pending completion of concurrent union grievance.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the ground of disability, along with a request to expedite the proceedings due to financial and mental hardship following his termination.

The respondent school board and the applicant's union were already engaged in a grievance process regarding the termination, with mediation scheduled.

The Tribunal denied the request to expedite, finding the circumstances were not truly urgent compared to regular processes.

The Tribunal also ordered the deferral of the application pending the conclusion of the ongoing grievance process, as it involved the same facts and issues.

Hudecki v. Thames Valley District School Board, 2009 HRTO 612

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 8, 2009

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 discrimination on the basis of race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, and citizenship.

She cited mental and emotional effects, including the inability to concentrate on a Pharmacist's Exam.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the alleged harm did not meet the high threshold of truly urgent circumstances required to prioritize the application over other matters.

Carmen Nuque v. Medisystem Pharmacy and Anna Kolonikina, 2009 HRTO 600

Sherry Liang

Request to expedite denied; alleged financial harm does not meet the threshold for urgent circumstances.

The applicant filed an application alleging age discrimination and requested that the matter be expedited due to the financial consequences of a potential decrease in compensation.

The Tribunal reviewed the request without requiring a response from the respondents.

Applying the high threshold for urgency, the Tribunal found that the alleged financial harm did not constitute an urgent circumstance warranting priority over other matters.

The request to expedite was denied.

Morgan Mulvihill v. TNS Canadian Facts Inc., 2009 HRTO 578

Sherry Liang

Union granted leave to intervene; submissions requested on deferring human rights application pending ongoing grievances.

The applicant, a seasonal worker, alleged discrimination and harassment on the grounds of disability and age regarding a premature layoff and denial of winter work.

The applicant's union requested to intervene in the application, which was granted on consent.

Noting that the facts of the application substantially overlapped with ongoing union grievances, the Tribunal requested submissions from the parties on whether the application should be deferred pending the conclusion of the grievance process.

Ken Leblanc v. City of Toronto, 2009 HRTO 573

Sherry Liang

Motion to add corporate respondent and suspend disclosure obligations due to bankruptcy granted.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging employment discrimination based on pregnancy.

She brought a Request for Order to add Claybrooke Marketing Inc. as a respondent, which was granted.

The applicant also requested a suspension of disclosure obligations due to the recent bankruptcy of the organizational respondent.

The Tribunal suspended the disclosure requirements pending further direction.

Rachel Doucette v. Claybrooke Inc., Claybrooke Marketing Inc. and Patrick Sharp, 2009 HRTO 572

Sherry Liang

Parties directed to file required declarations before Tribunal determines Request for Interim Remedy.

The applicant filed a Request for Interim Remedy following her human rights application.

Neither the applicant nor the respondents filed the declarations required by Rules 23.3 and 23.5 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The Tribunal directed both parties to file the required declarations before it would determine the Request, and scheduled an oral hearing for submissions.

Howard v. Halton Condominium Corporation No. 59, 2009 HRTO 563

Sherry Liang

Tribunal orders applicant to provide particulars, grants union intervention, and denies respondent's request to defer.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and harassment in employment based on race, ancestry, place of origin, and ethnic origin.

In this interim decision, the Tribunal directed the applicant to provide further particulars regarding his allegations.

The Tribunal granted the union's request to intervene, noting its interest as the applicant's bargaining agent.

The Tribunal dismissed the respondent's request to defer the application pending the outcome of an OLRB complaint against the union, finding that the legal issues and framework were different.

Finally, the Tribunal directed the parties to comply with pre-hearing production rules.

Thao Ngoc Chau v. Olymel S.E.C./L.P., 2009 HRTO 562

Sherry Liang

Application withdrawn with leave of the Tribunal.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw his human rights application pursuant to Rule 10 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The respondent made no submissions.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

Brown v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2009 HRTO 560

Sherry Liang

Human rights application withdrawn with leave of the Tribunal.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw his human rights application pursuant to Rule 10 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The respondents made no submissions.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

D’Souza v. Kraft Canada, 2009 HRTO 559

Sherry Liang

Human rights application deemed abandoned after applicant failed to deliver withdrawal request to respondents.

The applicant filed a Request to Withdraw an Application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code but failed to deliver it to the respondents and file a Statement of Delivery as directed.

Having taken no further steps, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and closed the file.

Jain v. McDougall, 2009 HRTO 558

Sherry Liang

Human rights application withdrawn with leave of the Tribunal.

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

The respondent made no submissions.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

Chirumbwana v. McLean Budden, 2009 HRTO 557

Sherry Liang

Human rights application withdrawn with consent of the respondents.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw her human rights application.

The respondents consented to the withdrawal.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

Schroeder v. Topline – Westmoreland Sales, 2009 HRTO 556

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 29, 2009

Request to remove respondent's counsel for alleged conflict of interest dismissed.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination and harassment in employment on the basis of sexual orientation, along with reprisal.

In an interim request, the applicant sought an order directing that counsel for the respondent hospital cease representing certain individual respondents, alleging a conflict of interest.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding no basis to support the extraordinary measure of removing a legal representative.

The Tribunal also directed that mediation be scheduled.

Lafond v. Hopital Montfort, 2009 HRTO 529

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 28, 2009

Request for document production order denied as applicant's suspicion of withheld documents was insufficient.

The applicant requested an order directing the respondent to produce internal emails and memos regarding her termination and the closure of her department.

The respondent objected, stating it had conducted a diligent search and produced all relevant documents.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding no basis to conclude that any specific relevant document had been withheld, noting that the applicant's suspicion alone was insufficient for an order.

Jean Wong v. G.H. Imported Merchandise & Sales Limited c.o.b. as Ash City, 2009 HRTO 523

Sherry Liang

Application withdrawn with leave of the Tribunal.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw their human rights application against the respondents.

The respondents made no submissions on the request.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

Chen v. Floor and Wall Studio, 2009 HRTO 480

Sherry Liang

Leave to withdraw human rights application granted.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw his human rights application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The respondent made no submissions on the request.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

Adam v. Raney, 2009 HRTO 479

Sherry Liang

Human rights application withdrawn with leave of the Tribunal.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw her human rights application pursuant to Rule 10 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The respondent made no submissions.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

Matechuk v. OLG at Thousand Islands, 2009 HRTO 478

Sherry Liang

Employment and Labour Law

Application withdrawn with leave of the Tribunal.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw their human rights application pursuant to Rule 10 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The respondent made no submissions.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

Thillainadarajah v. Ceridian Canada, 2009 HRTO 477

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

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 13, 2009

Human rights application deferred pending completion of related WSIB proceedings.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the ground of disability following a workplace injury.

The applicant requested that the application be deferred pending the completion of related proceedings at the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB).

As the respondents did not object, the Tribunal granted the request and deferred the application.

Gibson v. Arc Resources Canada, 2009 HRTO 624

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 12, 2009

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

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

The respondents requested that the application be deferred because the facts were part of an ongoing grievance process referred to arbitration by the applicant's union.

The Tribunal found no reason to depart from its usual approach of deferring applications where there is an ongoing grievance based on the same facts and issues.

The application was deferred pending the conclusion of the grievance.

Catherine Cloutier v. Upper Canada District School Board, 2009 HRTO 616

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 11, 2009

Request to expedite denied and human rights application deferred pending completion of concurrent union grievance.

The respondent school board and the applicant's union were already engaged in a grievance process regarding the termination, with mediation scheduled.

The Tribunal denied the request to expedite, finding the circumstances were not truly urgent compared to regular processes.

The Tribunal also ordered the deferral of the application pending the conclusion of the ongoing grievance process, as it involved the same facts and issues.

Hudecki v. Thames Valley District School Board, 2009 HRTO 612

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioMay 8, 2009

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 discrimination on the basis of race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, and citizenship.

She cited mental and emotional effects, including the inability to concentrate on a Pharmacist's Exam.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the alleged harm did not meet the high threshold of truly urgent circumstances required to prioritize the application over other matters.

Carmen Nuque v. Medisystem Pharmacy and Anna Kolonikina, 2009 HRTO 600

Sherry Liang

Request to expedite denied; alleged financial harm does not meet the threshold for urgent circumstances.

The applicant filed an application alleging age discrimination and requested that the matter be expedited due to the financial consequences of a potential decrease in compensation.

The Tribunal reviewed the request without requiring a response from the respondents.

Applying the high threshold for urgency, the Tribunal found that the alleged financial harm did not constitute an urgent circumstance warranting priority over other matters.

The request to expedite was denied.

Morgan Mulvihill v. TNS Canadian Facts Inc., 2009 HRTO 578

Sherry Liang

Union granted leave to intervene; submissions requested on deferring human rights application pending ongoing grievances.

The applicant, a seasonal worker, alleged discrimination and harassment on the grounds of disability and age regarding a premature layoff and denial of winter work.

The applicant's union requested to intervene in the application, which was granted on consent.

Ken Leblanc v. City of Toronto, 2009 HRTO 573

Sherry Liang

Motion to add corporate respondent and suspend disclosure obligations due to bankruptcy granted.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging employment discrimination based on pregnancy.

She brought a Request for Order to add Claybrooke Marketing Inc. as a respondent, which was granted.

The applicant also requested a suspension of disclosure obligations due to the recent bankruptcy of the organizational respondent.

The Tribunal suspended the disclosure requirements pending further direction.

Rachel Doucette v. Claybrooke Inc., Claybrooke Marketing Inc. and Patrick Sharp, 2009 HRTO 572

Sherry Liang

Parties directed to file required declarations before Tribunal determines Request for Interim Remedy.

The applicant filed a Request for Interim Remedy following her human rights application.

Neither the applicant nor the respondents filed the declarations required by Rules 23.3 and 23.5 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The Tribunal directed both parties to file the required declarations before it would determine the Request, and scheduled an oral hearing for submissions.

Howard v. Halton Condominium Corporation No. 59, 2009 HRTO 563

Sherry Liang

Tribunal orders applicant to provide particulars, grants union intervention, and denies respondent's request to defer.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and harassment in employment based on race, ancestry, place of origin, and ethnic origin.

In this interim decision, the Tribunal directed the applicant to provide further particulars regarding his allegations.

The Tribunal granted the union's request to intervene, noting its interest as the applicant's bargaining agent.

The Tribunal dismissed the respondent's request to defer the application pending the outcome of an OLRB complaint against the union, finding that the legal issues and framework were different.

Finally, the Tribunal directed the parties to comply with pre-hearing production rules.

Thao Ngoc Chau v. Olymel S.E.C./L.P., 2009 HRTO 562

Sherry Liang

Application withdrawn with leave of the Tribunal.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw his human rights application pursuant to Rule 10 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The respondent made no submissions.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

Brown v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2009 HRTO 560

Sherry Liang

Human rights application withdrawn with leave of the Tribunal.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw his human rights application pursuant to Rule 10 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The respondents made no submissions.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

D’Souza v. Kraft Canada, 2009 HRTO 559

Sherry Liang

Human rights application deemed abandoned after applicant failed to deliver withdrawal request to respondents.

The applicant filed a Request to Withdraw an Application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code but failed to deliver it to the respondents and file a Statement of Delivery as directed.

Having taken no further steps, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and closed the file.

Jain v. McDougall, 2009 HRTO 558

Sherry Liang

Human rights application withdrawn with leave of the Tribunal.

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

The respondent made no submissions.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

Chirumbwana v. McLean Budden, 2009 HRTO 557

Sherry Liang

Human rights application withdrawn with consent of the respondents.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw her human rights application.

The respondents consented to the withdrawal.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

Schroeder v. Topline – Westmoreland Sales, 2009 HRTO 556

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 29, 2009

Request to remove respondent's counsel for alleged conflict of interest dismissed.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination and harassment in employment on the basis of sexual orientation, along with reprisal.

In an interim request, the applicant sought an order directing that counsel for the respondent hospital cease representing certain individual respondents, alleging a conflict of interest.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding no basis to support the extraordinary measure of removing a legal representative.

The Tribunal also directed that mediation be scheduled.

Lafond v. Hopital Montfort, 2009 HRTO 529

Sherry Liang

HRTOHuman Rights Tribunal of OntarioApr 28, 2009

Request for document production order denied as applicant's suspicion of withheld documents was insufficient.

The applicant requested an order directing the respondent to produce internal emails and memos regarding her termination and the closure of her department.

The respondent objected, stating it had conducted a diligent search and produced all relevant documents.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding no basis to conclude that any specific relevant document had been withheld, noting that the applicant's suspicion alone was insufficient for an order.

Jean Wong v. G.H. Imported Merchandise & Sales Limited c.o.b. as Ash City, 2009 HRTO 523

Sherry Liang

Application withdrawn with leave of the Tribunal.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw their human rights application against the respondents.

The respondents made no submissions on the request.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

Chen v. Floor and Wall Studio, 2009 HRTO 480

Sherry Liang

Leave to withdraw human rights application granted.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw his human rights application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The respondent made no submissions on the request.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

Adam v. Raney, 2009 HRTO 479

Sherry Liang

Human rights application withdrawn with leave of the Tribunal.

The applicant requested leave to withdraw her human rights application pursuant to Rule 10 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.

The respondent made no submissions.

The Tribunal granted leave and the application was withdrawn.

Matechuk v. OLG at Thousand Islands, 2009 HRTO 478

Sherry Liang