Ihlenfeld v. Great Blue Heron Charity Casino, 2009 HRTO 1577

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Elissa Ihlenfeld

Applicant

-and-

Great Blue Heron Charity Casino and CAW Canada Local 1090

Respondents

DECISION

Adjudicator: Eric Whist

Date: September 29, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 1577

Indexed as: Ihlenfeld v. Great Blue Heron Charity Casino

APPEARANCES

Elissa Ihlenfeld, Applicant ) No one appearing

Great Blue Heron Charity Casino, )

Respondent ) Kathryn Bird, counsel

CAW Canada Local 1090, Respondent ) Brian Stevens, representative

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 8, 2008.

2The Tribunal sent the applicant and her counsel (at the time) a Confirmation of Hearing notice by regular mail on May 29, 2009. The notice informed all parties that the Tribunal had scheduled a hearing of the Application on September 23, 2009 at 655 Bay Street, 14^th Floor, Toronto, Ontario, commencing at 9:30 AM.

3The respondents’ representatives attended the hearing at the date, time and place that was set out in the Confirmation of Hearing notice. The applicant did not appear and has not contacted the Tribunal to ask for an adjournment of the hearing.

4I am satisfied that the applicant has abandoned her Application and accordingly her Application is dismissed. The following are my reasons.

5The Tribunal mailed a number of documents to the applicant and her former counsel at the addresses she provided on her Application. None of these documents has been returned and the Tribunal has received no notification from the applicant of any change of address. I am satisfied that the applicant received notice of her hearing.

6The applicant’s previous counsel wrote to the Tribunal on September 3, 2009 indicating that he wished to be removed as the applicant’s counsel of record, later indicating in an e-mail to the Tribunal dated September 14, 2009, that he had been unable to get in contact with the applicant.

7At the hearing I invited submissions from the respondents’ representatives on how I should deal with the applicant’s failure to appear. The respondents’ representatives requested that the Tribunal dismiss the Application on the basis that the applicant has abandoned her Application.

8Rule 3.13 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure states:

Where a party has been notified of a hearing and fails to attend, the Tribunal may:

a) proceed in the party’s absence;

b) determine that the party is not entitled to further notice of the proceedings;

c) determine that the party is not entitled to present evidence or make submissions to the Tribunal;

d) decide the Application based solely on the materials before it;

e) take any other action it considers appropriate.

9The applicant commenced a legal proceeding when she filed her Application with the Tribunal. It is the applicant’s responsibility to participate in this proceeding by taking the necessary steps to pursue it, including attending the hearing scheduled to consider the allegations raised in the Application. She has not done so. As the applicant received timely and proper notice of the hearing and failed to attend the hearing, I am satisfied the Application may be dismissed as abandoned.