24 total
Motion for extension of time to appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and merit.
The self-represented plaintiff brought a motion seeking extensions of time to appeal several previous orders, including costs orders and dismissals of her actions.
The Divisional Court dismissed the motion, finding it lacked jurisdiction over the appeals on the merits, which properly lay to the Court of Appeal.
Furthermore, the court found the proposed appeals lacked merit and noted the plaintiff's history of initiating a proliferation of meritless lawsuits using fee waivers.
The court awarded costs to the defendants and ordered that the plaintiff take no further steps in any proceeding until all outstanding costs are paid.
Complaint dismissed for lack of jurisdiction due to failure to provide required notice to Deputy Minister.
The complainant filed a complaint claiming payment for a missed overtime opportunity.
The employer raised a preliminary objection to the Board's jurisdiction because the complainant failed to provide notice of a proposal to file a complaint to the Deputy Minister within 14 days, as required by Ontario Regulation 378/07.
The Board held that the failure to provide this notice is fatal to the complaint, as the Board has no jurisdiction where the dispute resolution process has not run its course.
The complaint was dismissed.
Human rights application alleging reprisal in hiring dismissed for no reasonable prospect of success.
The applicant alleged discrimination with respect to employment because of reprisal contrary to the Human Rights Code, claiming he was not hired for several positions due to his previous human rights applications.
The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application had no reasonable prospect of success.
The Tribunal found that the applicant could not point to any evidence, beyond his own suspicions, that would establish an intention to reprise against him.
The application was dismissed.
Grievance over unsuccessful job application resolved by consent order granting grievor an interview for future competition.
The Union filed a grievance alleging the Employer violated the collective agreement by not awarding the grievor the position of Investigations Officer.
The parties agreed to resolve the dispute in a summary fashion under the collective agreement.
The Grievance Settlement Board issued a consent order requiring the Employer to screen the grievor in and grant her an interview for one future Investigations Officer competition within a specified region and timeframe, without guaranteeing she will be the successful candidate.
