Shahnaz Esmati v. Costco (Optical Department) and Mohammad Javai, 2009 HRTO 1020

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Shahnaz Esmati

Applicant

-and-

Costco (Optical Department) and Mohammad Javai

Respondents

interim DECISION

Adjudicator: Jay Sengupta

Date: July 10, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 1020

Indexed as: Esmati v. Costco

1The applicant filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, (the “Code”), on April 29, 2009. On May 22, 2009, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Application and delivered the Application to the respondents by regular mail at the addresses provided by the applicant. The Notice directed the respondents to file a Response with the Tribunal no later than thirty-five (35) days from the date of the Notice. Rule 1.22 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure confirms that a document delivered by mail is deemed received five days after the postmark date.

2It is now more than ten days after the date for filing the Response. Neither the corporate respondent nor the personal respondent has filed a Response, or otherwise communicated with the Tribunal. The Tribunal’s Notice has not been returned.

3A Tribunal application is a legal proceeding. If a violation of the Code is found the Tribunal may order a respondent to make monetary compensation or other forms of restitution to the applicant and to take steps to promote future compliance with the Code. Failure to file a response may lead to orders against a respondent without their participation. The respondents’ attention is drawn to Rule 5.5 of the Tribunal’s Rules which reads as follows:

Where an Application is delivered to a Respondent who does not respond to the Application, the Tribunal may:

a) deem the Respondent to have accepted all of the allegations in the Application;

b) proceed to deal with the Application without further notice to the Respondent;

c) deem the Respondent to have waived all rights with respect to further notice or participation in the proceeding;

d) decide the matter based only on the material before the Tribunal.

4The applicant has provided an alternate address for service for the corporate respondent but indicates she has no other address for the individual respondent other than the address of the workplace that was previously provided. The Tribunal shall send a copy of this Interim Decision to the respondents at both addresses provided by the applicant by regular mail and courier.

5If the respondents wish to participate in this proceeding, a Response must be filed by July 20, 2009, together with an explanation why it was not filed in accordance with the deadline contained in the Notice of Application. If the Response is not received by this date, the Tribunal may proceed without further notice to the respondents, and may take any or all of the other steps set out in Rule 5.5.

6I am not seized of this matter.