David Anamguya v. Intercon Security Limited, Blair Mitchell and Nicole Lentinello, 2009 HRTO 1148

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

David Anamguya Applicant

-and-

Intercon Security Limited, Blair Mitchell and Nicole Lentinello Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Judith Keene Date: July 27, 2009 Citation: 2009 HRTO 1148 Indexed as: Anamguya v. Intercon Security

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 November 7, 2008. The Application alleges discrimination in employment.

2The respondents filed a Response on March 13, 2009, and the matter has been scheduled for a hearing on October 5 and 6, 2009. On June 25, 2009, the respondents served and filed a Request for Order during Proceedings seeking dismissal of the Application on the basis that the applicant had signed a release on April 2, 2009. Along with their Request, the respondents provided a copy of the signed release and accompanying correspondence setting out the terms and conditions of the applicant’s employment termination.

3The Request for Order served on the applicant indicated that, within two weeks, he could respond to the Request for by delivering and filing a Form 11 responding to the allegation that he had signed a full and final release. The applicant has not done so. 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.

4More than ten days after the date for filing the Response to the Request have passed, and the applicant has neither filed a Response nor otherwise communicated with the Tribunal. The Tribunal’s Notice has not been returned.

5The Tribunal orders that on or before August 6, 2009, the applicant shall write to the Tribunal, with a copy to the respondents, advising whether he intends to pursue this Application. If he does wish to pursue the Application, he must state in his letter why, in his submission, the release does not bar the Application. Following receipt of the applicant’s written submissions, the Tribunal will schedule an opportunity for the parties to make oral submissions, unless the applicant states in his letter that he wishes the matter dealt with only in writing.

6If the applicant makes no submissions by August 6, 2009, the Application may be dismissed as abandoned.

7I am not seized of this matter.