Navaratnam v. Toronto Dominion Insurance, 2009 HRTO 105

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Logarajah Navaratnam Applicant

-and-

Toronto Dominion Insurance Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Alan Whyte Date: January 30, 2009 Citation: 2009 HRTO 105 Indexed as: Navaratnam v. Toronto Dominion Insurance

1This is an Application alleging discrimination on the basis of race, color and disability in employment. The respondent was identified as "Toronto Dominion Insurance (TD insurance)". A Request to Expedite Proceedings was filed with the Application, and was subsequently dismissed by the Tribunal in its Interim Decision Navaratnam v. Toronto Dominion Insurance, 2008 HRTO 394.

2In its Response to Request to Expedite Proceedings, the respondent indicated that it had been wrongly named as the applicant's employer, and that the applicant was in fact employed by the Toronto Dominion Bank. The respondent further asserted that the Toronto Dominion Bank is subject to federal jurisdiction and that therefore this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear the Application.

3In the Interim Decision, the Tribunal also required submissions from the applicant (and any supporting documentation) as to the proper name of his employer and as to whether his employer is subject to provincial or federal jurisdiction, to be filed by December 31, 2008. The respondent was to file reply submissions by January 12, 2009. No submissions were received from either party. The Tribunal notes that the respondent was only required to file submissions in reply to those filed by the applicant.

4It is very important that parties to proceedings before the Tribunal comply with its interim directions, in order that the Tribunal can fulfill its statutory mandate of providing fair, just and expeditious resolutions of human rights disputes.

5Without the requested submissions, the Tribunal is not in a position to determine which entity the applicant was employed by, nor is it in a position to determine the corollary question of which jurisdiction that entity is subject to.

6The Tribunal therefore orders:

(a) the applicant to deliver to the respondent and file with the Tribunal by February 13, 2009 the submissions requested in the Interim Decision dated December 15, 2008;

(b) the respondent to deliver to the applicant and file with the Tribunal reply submissions by February 23, 2009.

7If no submissions are received from the applicant within the time limit set out above, the Tribunal will dismiss this Application.

8I am not seized of this matter.