Genny Na

The applicant filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings to reactivate her human rights application, which had been deferred pending the conclusion of a grievance proceeding.

The applicant acknowledged that the grievance proceeding was still ongoing and a hearing was scheduled.

The respondent opposed the reactivation.

The Tribunal denied the request to reactivate the application because, under Rules 14.3 and 14.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure, an application deferred pending another legal proceeding cannot be reactivated until that other proceeding has concluded.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of sex.

The applicant and her representative failed to attend the scheduled hearing, having requested an accommodation to participate by telephone only three days prior.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide sufficient medical information to justify the late accommodation request or to establish an inability to attend in person.

As the applicant failed to appear and provide evidence, the application was dismissed as abandoned.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of disability after his YMCA membership was terminated.

The respondent maintained the termination was due to a history of inappropriate behaviour and complaints.

Following a summary hearing to determine if the application had a reasonable prospect of success, the Tribunal dismissed the application, finding the applicant failed to articulate any link between the termination of his membership and his disability.

The respondent requested early dismissal of a human rights application under section 34(11) of the Human Rights Code, arguing that the applicant had filed a parallel civil claim for wrongful dismissal based on the same facts.

The Tribunal found that the civil claim did not raise the Code or seek remedies for discrimination.

As duplication of facts alone does not trigger section 34(11), the request for early dismissal was refused and the matter was directed to mediation.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of sex and family status regarding her termination.

She had previously commenced a civil action for wrongful dismissal based on the same factual circumstances, alleging her termination was due to her pregnancy.

The Tribunal held that section 34(11) of the Human Rights Code barred the application because the civil proceeding sought remedies for an alleged Code infringement arising from the same facts, even though the Code was not explicitly pleaded in the civil action.

The application was dismissed.