Anna Kalinichenko

The applicant requested to amend his human rights application to add allegations of reprisal and to modify the requested remedies.

The respondent did not file a response to the request.

The Tribunal allowed the amendments, finding that they provided particulars of incidents already detailed in the application, that there was no prejudice to the respondent, and that sufficient time remained before the hearing for the respondent to prepare.

The applicant filed a Request for Order During Proceedings to add her supervisor as a personal respondent, add the ground of reprisal, and amend the remedy sought from $35,000 to $150,000.

The corporate respondent opposed the requests, arguing that it would be deemed liable for the supervisor's actions under s. 46.3(1) of the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal granted the requests, finding that the supervisor's conduct was a central issue, s. 46.3(1) does not apply to harassment allegations, and the amendments to the grounds and remedies were appropriate at this stage of the proceedings.

The applicant alleged discrimination on the basis of race, colour, place of origin, and ethnic origin when the respondents decided not to hire him after an interview.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine whether the application should be dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal found that the application could not be dismissed at this preliminary stage, noting that the respondents' owner asked the applicant where he was from during the interview, which could potentially breach section 23(2) of the Human Rights Code.

The respondents' motion to dismiss was denied, and the application was allowed to continue.

The applicant, who has amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and uses a wheelchair, filed an application alleging the respondent school board failed to accommodate his disability in a printmaking class.

He filed a Request to Expedite the application, citing impending danger of serious health deterioration.

The Tribunal granted the request, finding the applicant's health issues constituted truly urgent circumstances.

The Tribunal slightly abridged the time for the respondent to file a response and directed the parties to immediately schedule an expedited mediation.