Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Romeo King

Applicant

-and-

Enersource Hydro Mississauga Inc., Irving Wolkowicz, Milac Holdings Limited and Nando Iannicca

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Alan Whyte

Date: October 2, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 1579

Indexed as: King v. Enersource Hydro Mississauga

1On May 25, 2009, the applicant filed an Application under Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), alleging discrimination in housing on the basis of race.

2Responses have been received from Enersource Hydro Mississauga Inc. (“Enersource”), Irving Wolkowicz (“Wolkowicz”), Milac Holdings Limited (“Milac”) and Nando Iannicca (Iannicca).

3The applicant named “Milac Holdings Limited o/a Braidwood Housing” as a single respondent. Milac has provided corporate searches of Milac, Braidwood Developments Ltd. and Braidwood Holdings and Property Management Inc. It is clear that Milac and the two Braidwood companies are unrelated. Therefore the reference to Braidwood Housing in the original style of cause in this matter has been removed, without prejudice to the applicant's ability to supply new information to the Tribunal with respect to another Braidwood entity that he may wish to have added as a respondent in this matter.

4The following Requests for Orders during Proceedings (RFOPS) have been filed by the respondents:

a) Enersource - request to dismiss the Application for lack of jurisdiction, or alternatively, an order removing it as a respondent;

b) Milac - request to dismiss the Application against it for no prima facie case and for delay; request for particulars and to amend Response;

c) Wolkowicz - request to dismiss the Application as against Wolkowicz for lack of jurisdiction, no prima facie case and delay; and

d) Iannicca - request to dismiss the Application as against Iannicca for no prima facie case, or in the alternative, to substitute the Corporation of the City of Mississauga as a respondent.

5The applicant has filed Responses to all the RFOPs.

6In my view, the most expeditious way to address the RFOPs is to hold a telephone conference call in which the following issues will be addressed:

a) whether there is a prima facie case of discrimination against any of the respondents;

b) whether the allegations of discrimination fall within the social area of “housing” as opposed to “goods, services and facilities”;

c) if a prima facie case is found to exist against Iannicca, whether he should be removed as a respondent and the Corporation of the City of Mississauga substituted as the respondent;

d) whether the Application should be dismissed on the basis of delay in relation to Milac and Wolkowicz. In addressing this issue, the applicant should be prepared to make submissions regarding whether the delay was incurred in good faith and the respondents should be prepared to make submissions as to whether they have incurred substantial prejudice, as referred to in section 34(2) of the Code.

e) whether the Application is within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.

The party seeking a remedy by way of a RFOP shall make submissions first, followed by the other parties other than the applicant, then the applicant may make submissions, followed by brief reply from the first party.

7By at least 14 days prior to the date established by the Registrar for the telephone conference call, the parties shall:

a) advise the Registrar in writing as to whether or not there are any other issues to be addressed, other than those listed in paragraph 5, which arise from the RFOPs;

b) advise the Registrar in writing as to any other material facts that the party intends to rely on other than those set out in the RFOPs already filed; and

c) provide any case law that the party intends to rely on other than such case law that has already been provided by way of the RFOPs.

The parties are reminded of the obligation under the Rules to copy all other parties on any correspondence to the Registrar.

8The Registrar will schedule a half day conference call hearing in order to address the above issues.

[9] The applicant may wish to review the Tribunal’s Rules and Guide to its processes and list of resources including the Human Rights Legal Support Centre which are available on the Tribunal’s website at www.hrto.ca.

10I am not seized.