King v. Enersource Hydro Mississauga, 2009 HRTO 1132

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Romeo King Applicant

-and-

Enersource Hydro Mississauga Inc., Irving Wolkowicz, Milac Holdings Limited o/a Braidwood Housing, and Nando Iannicca Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Alan Whyte Date: July 24, 2009 Citation: 2009 HRTO 1132 Indexed as: King v. Enersource Hydro Mississauga

Reasons for Decision

1On May 25, 2009, the applicant filed an Application under Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"), alleging discrimination in housing on the basis of race.

2On June 4, 2009, the Tribunal sent the Application to the respondents by regular mail at the addresses provided by the applicant, together with a direction to respond no later than thirty-five (35) days from that date, in accordance with the Tribunal Rules. Under Rule 1.22 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure, a document delivered by mail is deemed received five days after the postmark date.

3The Tribunal has received Responses from the respondents Enersource Hydro Mississauga Inc. and Nando Iannicca. Irving Wolkowicz recently contacted the Tribunal to advise that the address provided for him in the Application is incorrect and out-dated. He is directed to file his Response with the Tribunal no later than thirty-five days from the date he received the Application at his new address.

4It has now been over one week since the Response from Milac Holdings Limited o/a Braidwood Housing ("Milac") was due. No Response has been received from Milac nor has the Tribunal's original correspondence been returned.

5A Tribunal application is a legal proceeding. If a violation of the Code is found, the Tribunal may order respondents 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 or participate in a Tribunal proceeding may lead to orders against individual and corporate respondents without their participation. The respondents' attention is drawn to Rule 5.5 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure, which reads as follows:

5.5 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.

6The Tribunal will send this Interim Decision and another copy of the Application to Milac by regular mail and courier. If Milac wishes to participate in this proceeding, a Response must be filed by August 14, 2009 together with an explanation of why the Response was not filed earlier in accordance with the Tribunal Rules. If a Response is not received by this date, the Tribunal may proceed without further notice to Milac, and may take any or all of the other steps set out in Rule 5.5.

7The Tribunal's website includes information for applicants and respondents, including a Respondent's Guide, which is found under the new Applications tab on the site at www.hrto.ca. A copy of the Guide may also be requested from the Tribunal Registrar.

8I am not seized of this matter.