Dennis Touesnard

The applicant filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings seeking production of video surveillance footage of an incident.

The respondent opposed the request, stating that the footage was no longer available as its system memory only went back to May 5, 2017.

The Tribunal found that while the footage would be arguably relevant, it could not order the production of something that does not exist.

The request was denied, subject to the applicant's right to cross-examine the respondent's witnesses at the hearing.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability.

The respondent requested that the application be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, arguing that its business as a telecommunications contractor for Rogers Communications falls under federal jurisdiction.

Relying on a recent Ontario Labour Relations Board decision involving the same respondent, the Tribunal found that the respondent failed to displace the strong presumption of provincial jurisdiction over labour relations.

The request to dismiss was denied and the application was allowed to proceed.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of disability following a workplace injury, claiming the respondent failed to accommodate him and terminated his employment.

The respondent requested that the application be dismissed or deferred due to an ongoing union grievance and ongoing appeals before the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB).

The Tribunal denied the request to dismiss under s. 45.1 of the Human Rights Code because the parallel proceedings were not yet completed.

However, the Tribunal granted the request to defer the application, finding a significant overlap of facts and issues between the application, the grievance, and the WSIB appeals.

The application was deferred pending the completion of the grievance and WSIB proceedings.

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

The respondent requested that the application be dismissed under s. 45.1 of the Human Rights Code, arguing that an inspection and orders by an Occupational Health and Safety Inspector dealt with the substance of the application.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the Inspector's orders related to machine safety and worker representation, and did not address the applicant's specific allegations of discriminatory treatment or workplace harassment.