Marisa Osman v. Elle Productions Security Company and Lori McInskie, 2009 HRTO 1426

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Marisa Osman

Applicant

-and-

Elle Productions Security Company and Lori McInskie

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Faisal Bhabha

Date: September 8, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 1426

Indexed as: Osman v. Elle Productions 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 September 9, 2008. The Tribunal issued a Notice of Application and attempted to deliver the Application to the respondents by regular mail at the address provided by the applicant. The corporate respondent was served “care of” the personal respondent. No Response was received from either respondent. The purpose of this Interim Decision is to direct the applicant to provide further information with respect to contact information for the respondents.

2On May 28, 2009, the Tribunal issued an Interim Decision, 2009 HRTO 854, which was forwarded to the parties by courier delivery. In that Interim Decision, the Tribunal directed the respondents to file a Response no later than June 10, 2009. The courier packages were returned marked as “bad address”.

3As explained by the Tribunal in Guild v. Kyle-Jansen, 2008 HRTO 347, while the Tribunal forwards completed applications to respondents, it is the responsibility of the applicant to provide accurate contact information, and the Tribunal relies on applicants to provide a correct address for respondents named in their applications.

4Rule 6.6(b) provides that the Tribunal will not deal with an application in respect of a respondent who cannot be contacted at the contact information provided by the applicant. Generally, in such cases, the applicant will be required to explain what efforts were undertaken to find and verify a current address for the respondent, and explain why this contact information is believed to be the “most recent address”, see Guild, supra, and Begley v. Eratostene, 2009 HRTO 235.

5In the present circumstances, it appears that the contact information provided by the applicant for the respondents is either incorrect or incomplete. The Tribunal directs the applicant to verify whether or not the address is accurate and to provide the most current and complete contact information for the respondents. The applicant will be required to make efforts to ascertain an address or contact information for the respondents, or provide information to demonstrate why the address provided in the Application is believed to be correct.

6The Tribunal makes the following order:

a. If the applicant wishes to proceed with this Application, the applicant shall, within 20 days of the date of this Interim Decision, provide current, complete and accurate addresses for the respondents and explain the steps taken to ensure that the addresses are current, complete and accurate; and

b. If the applicant believes that the address previously provided in the Application is in fact current, complete and accurate contact information for both respondents, the applicant shall provide the reasons for that belief, and the steps taken to verify the address is current, complete and accurate.

7I am not seized of this matter.