HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Kimberley McHugh

Complainant

-and-

Ontario Human Rights Commission

Commission

-and-

Casino Rama Services,

Corey Calvert, Aaron Johnston, Valerie Spurgeon,

Debra Pratt, Sandy Emms, Brian Munson,

Stacey Beaver, Steven Chase and Ritchie Hawkins

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Sherry Liang

Date: January 31, 2008

Citation: 2008 HRTO 8

Indexed as: McHugh v. Casino Rama Services et al

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

400 University Avenue, 7^th^ Floor

Toronto ON M7A 1T7

Phone (416) 314-0004 Fax (416) 314-8743 Toll free 1-800-668-3946

TTY (416) 314-2379 / 1-800-424-1168

E-mail hrto.registrar@ontario.ca

Website www.hrto.ca

APPEARANCES

Kimberley McHugh, Complainant ) On her own behalf

Ontario Human Rights Commission ) Sheena Scott, Counsel

Casino Rama Services, Aaron Johnston, )

Valerie Spurgeon, Debra Pratt, Sandy Emms, ) Donna D’Andrea, Counsel

Stacey Beaver, Steven Chase, Respondents )

Corey Calvert, Brian Munson, Ritchie Hawkins, ) No one appearing

Respondents )

INTRODUCTION

[1] In this complaint, Kimberley McHugh alleges that she was harassed in the workplace on the basis of family status, sex and perceived sexual orientation. She alleges that she complained about this harassment by her co-workers to her employer, Casino Rama Services, but that her employer failed to address the matter adequately and allowed the poisoned work environment to continue. It is also alleged that Casino Rama directed reprisals against Ms. McHugh for making her complaint to the Ontario Human Rights Commission (the “Commission”).

[2] This complaint is made under the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 and was referred to the Tribunal by letter received October 19, 2006.

[3] The hearing in this matter was scheduled to begin on January 28, 2008. Present at the hearing on this date were counsel for the Commission, counsel for Casino Rama and some of the personal respondents, and the complainant. Ritchie Hawkins, a personal respondent, did not appear, despite having been given notice of this hearing.

[4] Counsel for Casino Rama informed the Tribunal at the hearing that she was not representing certain personal respondents, Corey Calvert and Brian Munson, who have left the employ of Casino Rama. During discussions between the parties and the Tribunal about the implications of this on the hearing of the complaint, counsel also indicated that Steven Chase may also no longer be represented by her firm and undertook to clarify this as soon as possible.

[5] The result of this is as follows. Various steps throughout the Tribunal’s processes to date (such as the filing of pleadings and the conduct of the Pre-Hearing Conference Call) have been taken by counsel for Casino Rama acting on behalf of the company, as well as all of the personal respondents, except Mr. Hawkins. Communications from the Tribunal to the personal respondents have been directed to counsel, with the exception of Mr. Hawkins with whom the Tribunal has corresponded directly. The notice of this hearing was thus sent to counsel as the representative of those individuals, and not directly to the individuals.

[6] Counsel now takes the position that she does not represent these personal respondents, none of whom were in attendance and none of whom has been given direct notice of the hearing by the Tribunal. The parties agreed that, in these circumstances, these personal respondents should be notified of these proceedings so that they can consider whether to participate and retain their own legal representation if they choose to.

[7] The dilemma facing the parties and the Tribunal is obvious. Eight days have been set aside for the hearing of this complaint. These days have been known for several months. Only at the outset of the hearing was the Tribunal informed of this change in representation. Although adjourning these hearing dates will result in delay in resolving this complaint (not to mention the unnecessary costs associated with arranging, preparing for and attending the hearing dates as set), the Tribunal is compelled to cancel them in order to ensure procedural fairness to the personal respondents.

[8] At the hearing, counsel for Casino Rama agreed to provide the Tribunal forthwith with the last known addresses for these individuals, and to confirm whether she continues to represent Steven Chase. Counsel will also serve the pleadings and disclosure documents on these personal respondents, and file Statements of Service with the Tribunal.

[9] After the conclusion of the hearing on January 28, counsel for Casino Rama sent the Tribunal a letter with the last known addresses for Mr. Calvert, Mr. Munson and Mr. Chase and confirmed that her firm is “not retained” as counsel to them.

[10] The hearing dates scheduled for January 28, 29, 30, February 1, 4, 5, 6 and 7 are hereby adjourned. The parties present at the hearing on January 28 have agreed to meet for mediation of the complaint on January 29. If the complaint is not fully resolved as a result of this mediation, the Tribunal will re-convene a Pre-Hearing Conference Call to discuss and if necessary issue directions on how to proceed with the hearing.

[11] The complainant confirmed at the hearing that although she is representing herself for the purpose of the hearing, her address for service remains that of her legal counsel.

Dated at Toronto, this 31st day of January, 2008.

“signed by”

Sherry Liang

Vice Chair