Leong v. Ontario (Attorney General), 2009 HRTO 1209

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Amelia Leong

Applicant

-and-

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Attorney General

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Mary Truemner

Date: August 5, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 1209

Indexed as: Leong v. Ontario (Attorney General)

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BY

Amelia Leong ) On her own behalf

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 June 16, 2009. The style of cause is amended to reflect the correct name of the respondent. The Application alleges that the respondent discriminated against her with respect to employment because of her race, colour, ethnic origin and sex (the applicant created and put an “x” in a box marked “female”). In her Application, the applicant describes matters related to pay as discrimination, and alleges that the respondent did not pay her all the money that it owes her, particularly for hours worked in 2006 and 2007.

2On June 25, 2009, the Tribunal’s Registrar issued the applicant a Notice of Intent to Dismiss, which informed the applicant that the Application appears to be outside of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction because it was filed more than one year after the last alleged incident of discrimination. The Tribunal invited the applicant to provide written submissions to explain why the Application is within the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.

3The applicant provided written submissions dated July 22, 2009, which state that pay stubs dated as recently as May 28, 2009 prove that the respondent continues to provide inadequate pay, now in the context of sick pay.

4Rule 13.2 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure states that where it appears to the Tribunal that an Application is outside its jurisdiction, it shall, prior to sending the Application to the respondent, issue a Notice of Intent to Dismiss the Application. The Notice is only sent to the applicant, and requires her to file written submissions. Under the Tribunal’s jurisprudence, an application will only be dismissed at this preliminary stage if it is “plain and obvious” on the face of the Application that it does not fall within its jurisdiction: Masood v. Bruce Power, 2008 HRTO 381; Morin v. Alliance de la function publique du Canada, 2008 HRTO 58; Hotte v. Ontario (Finance), 2008 HRTO 63.

5In my view, it is not plain and obvious that the Application was filed more than one year from the last incident of alleged discrimination. The Tribunal will therefore continue to deal with the Application. This Interim Decision is not final regarding the Tribunal’s jurisdiction over this Application (Rule 13.5).

6The Tribunal shall serve the Application and a copy of this Interim Decision on the respondent.

7I am not seized of this matter.