minicounsel

David Rowland v. Canada Cartage Systems, 2009 HRTO 1693 — HRTO | minicounsel | minicounsel

October 16, 2009

David Rowland v. Canada Cartage Systems, 2009 HRTO 1693

Case Summary

The applicant filed a human rights application against the respondent. The respondent failed to file a Response within the required 35-day period. The Tribunal issued an interim decision warning the respondent of the consequences of failing to participate under Rule 5.5 and granted the respondent a final extension to October 23, 2009, to file a Response and explain the delay.

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

David Rowland

Applicant

-and-

Canada Cartage Systems

Respondent

INTERIM decision

Adjudicator: Alison Renton

Date: October 16, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 1693

Indexed as: Rowland v. Canada Cartage Systems

[1] The applicant filed an Application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), on March 20, 2009.

[2] On August 24, 2009, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Application to the respondent. The respondent was advised that a Response must be filed with the Tribunal not later than 35 days after August 24, 2009. As of the date of this Interim Decision the respondent has not filed a Response, nor has the Tribunal’s correspondence been returned.

[3] An 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 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.

[4] The applicant has provided an address, phone number and fax number of a contact person for the respondent. The Tribunal shall send a copy of this Interim Decision to the respondent by regular mail, courier and fax.

[5] If the respondent wishes to participate in this proceeding, it shall file a Response by October 23, 2009, 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 respondent and may take any or all of the steps set out in Rule 5.5.

[6] I am not seized of this matter.

Dated at Toronto, this 16^th^ day of October, 2009.

“Signed by”

Alison Renton

Vice-chair