Frolov v. Mosregion Investment Corporation, 2008 HRTO 135

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

David Dmitri Frolov Applicant

-and-

Mosregion Investment Corporation and Dina Stolyarova Respondents

AND B E T W E E N:

Dina Stolyarova Applicant

-and-

Mosregion Investment Corporation, Igor Bakouchev and David Frolov Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Eric Whist Date: October 9, 2008 Citation: 2008 HRTO 135 Indexed as: Frolov v. Mosregion Investment Corporation

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario 655 Bay Street, 14th Floor Toronto ON M7A 2A3 Phone (416) 326-1312 / 1-866-598-0322 Fax (416) 326-2199 / 1-866-355-6099 TTY (416) 314-2379 / 1-800-424-1168 E-mail hrto.registrar@ontario.ca Website www.hrto.ca

INTRODUCTION

1This interim decision relates to two separate applications before the Tribunal and whether they should be heard together or not. The applicant in File 2008-00070-I, David Frolov, (the Frolov Application) alleges that while employed, he was subjected to sexual solicitation or advances by Dina Stolyarova and names Dina Stolyarova and Mosregion Investment Corporation as respondents. The applicant in File 2008-00159-I, Dina Stolyarova, (the Stolyarova Application) alleges that while employed, she was sexually harassed and subjected to reprisal or threat of reprisal by David Frolov, her manager, and Ivan Bakouchev, the director and owner of Mosregion Investment Corporation. Dina Stolyarova names these two individuals and Mosregion Investment Corporation as respondents.

2The applicants filed their Applications under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended, (the “Code”). The Frolov Application was filed July 15, 2008 and the Stolyarova Application was filed on August 1, 2008.

3There is no agreement to attend mediation with the Tribunal.

4Frolov submits the Tribunal ought to hear his Application first. The personal respondent Igor Bakouchev agrees. Stolyarova asks that the two Applications be heard together. I am prepared to decide this issue based on the information before me.

DECISION

5In order to provide for the fair, just and expeditious resolution of any matter before it the Tribunal may consolidate or hear applications together. This is expressly indicated in Rule 1.7(d) of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure. I have decided that these two Applications will be heard together given the facts and issues common to both Applications.

7Having reviewed both the Frolov and Stolyarova Applications (and the responses, replies and documents) I find that there is a significant overlap in facts and issues in the two Applications. While the Applications clearly present divergent accounts of events, both Applications centre on the relationship between Frolov and Stolyarova while they worked at Mosregion Investment Corporation between September 2006 and July 2008. Both Applications refer to a large number of the same incidents during this period of time. Both refer to the conduct of Igor Bakouchev in response to what was alleged to have occurred between Frolov and Stolyarova during this time.

8I am of the opinion the most expeditious way in which to adduce evidence as to what occurred between Frolov, Stolyarova, Igor Bakouchev and Mosregion Investment Corporation and for a Tribunal member to assess this evidence is for the two Applications to be heard together.

8It is also the fair and just way to proceed. It allows both parties to present their cases essentially at the same time. The alternative of hearing the Applications sequentially, as was advocated, would unduly and unnecessarily disadvantage one of the parties.

ORDER

9The Tribunal makes the following order:

1. The Frolov and Stolyarova Applications will be scheduled to be heard together;

2. Following the exchange of hearing materials by the parties the Tribunal will issue further directions to the parties on how the hearing will be conducted.

10I am not seized of this matter.