Susan Warren v. Sam Calogero, 2009 HRTO 1257

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Susan Warren

Applicant

-and-

Sam Calogero

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Ken Bhattacharjee

Date: August 13, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 1257

Indexed as: Warren v. Calogero

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 January 14, 2009. The purpose of this Interim Decision is to address the respondent’s failure to file a Response to the Application.

2On March 26, 2009, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Application and delivered the Application to the respondent by regular mail at the address provided by the applicant. The Notice directed the respondent to file a Response with the Tribunal no later than thirty-five (35) days from the date of the Notice.

3On April 30, 2009, the Tribunal received a letter from a lawyer, who stated that he had been retained by the respondent. The letter requested an extension of time until May 8, 2009 to file the Response. The Tribunal did not receive a Response by or after May 8.

4On July 13, 2009, the Tribunal’s Registrar sent the respondent a letter, which stated that, due to an administrative oversight, the Tribunal did not respond to the respondent’s request for an extension of time to file his Response. As such, the Tribunal granted the respondent an extension of time until July 27, 2009 to file his Response.

5Rule 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. It is now more than five days after the date for filing the Response. The respondent has not filed a Response, or otherwise communicated with the Tribunal. The Tribunal’s Notice has not been returned.

6A Tribunal Application is a legal proceeding. If a violation of the Code is found the Tribunal may order a respondent to provide 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 his participation. The respondent’s 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.

7The applicant has provided a postal address for the respondent, and the Tribunal has received a letter from the respondent’s legal counsel. The Tribunal shall send a copy of this Interim Decision to the respondent by regular mail and courier, and to his legal counsel by regular mail, e-mail, fax, and courier.

8If the respondent wishes to participate in this proceeding, a Response must be filed by August 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 shall proceed without further notice to the respondent, and may take any or all of the other steps set out in Rule 5.5.

9I am not seized of this matter.