Basic v. Toronto Police Services Board, 2009 HRTO 1468

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Zvonimir Basic

Applicant

-and-

Toronto Police Services Board and Julia Knight

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Sherry Liang

Date: September 14, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 1468

Indexed as: Basic v. Toronto Police Services Board

1This is an Application filed on May 25, 2009, under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”). The applicant alleges discrimination in the provision of policing services arising out of events that occurred on May 13, 2009. The purpose of this Interim Decision is to address the failure by the individual respondent to file a Response, as well as a Request for Order filed by the applicant.

2In the Request for Order, the applicant asks the Tribunal to direct the individual respondent to pay the amount of $50,000 immediately, on the basis that she has not responded to the Application. The Request is denied. The Tribunal does not order a respondent who has not responded to pay the full amount of damages claimed by an applicant without further steps. Kearns v. 1327827 Ontario, 2009 HRTO 457, sets out the Tribunal’s approach in the event that a respondent has not filed a Response.

3On June 10, 2009, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Application to the respondents. The respondents were advised that a Response must be filed with the Tribunal not later than 35 days after June 10, 2009. As of the date of this Interim Decision the organizational respondent has filed a Response, but the individual respondent has not. The Tribunal’s correspondence has not been returned. The organizational respondent, the Toronto Police Services Board (“the Board”), takes the position in its Response that it has no responsibility for the incidents referred to in the Application.

4An application to the Tribunal starts a legal proceeding. A finding that a violation of the Code has occurred may lead to various orders, including monetary compensation, other forms of restitution to the applicant, and orders to take action to promote 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 individual respondent’s 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.

5The applicant has provided an address for the individual respondent, which appears to be the offices of 51 Division of the Toronto Police Services. The Tribunal shall send a copy of this Interim Decision to the individual respondent by regular mail and courier.

6If the individual respondent wishes to participate in this proceeding, she shall file a Response by 10 days from date of receipt of the Interim Decision, together with an explanation of why the Response was not filed in accordance with the Notice of Application. If a Response is not received, the Tribunal may proceed without further notice to the individual respondent and may take any or all of the steps set out in Rule 5.5.

7In the circumstances, and having regard to the Response filed by the Board, the Tribunal will also send a copy of the Application and this Interim Decision to the Chief of Police and the Toronto Police Association. If either of them wishes to intervene in this matter, they must file a Request to Intervene within 14 days of the date of receipt.

8I am not seized of this matter.