Sarah-Jane Edwards v. The Corporation of the Township of North Kawartha and Craig Watson, 2009 HRTO 1749

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Sarah-Jane Edwards

Applicant

-and-

The Corporation of the Township of North Kawartha and Craig Watson

Respondents

DECISION

Adjudicator: Ken Bhattacharjee

Date: October 22, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 1749

Indexed as: Edwards v. North Kawartha (Township)

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 November 3, 2008. The respondents filed a Response on January 9, 2009. The parties attended a mediation meeting on June 17, which did not result in a settlement of the Application.

2On August 11, 2009, the Tribunal sent the parties a Confirmation of Hearing notice by regular mail, which informed them that the Tribunal had scheduled a hearing of the Application on December 21, 22 and 23, 2009. On August 17, the respondent’s legal counsel wrote the Tribunal a letter, which stated that the respondents were not available on the scheduled dates, and requested that the hearing be rescheduled for the week of January 4, 2010 or on other dates in the same month.

3On August 17, 2009, a Tribunal staff person called the applicant and asked her whether she agreed with the respondents’ request to reschedule the hearing. The applicant stated that she would submit her availability dates in writing to the Tribunal’s Registrar. On August 27, the staff person called and left a voicemail message for the applicant, which asked whether she had written to the Registrar yet.

4On September 1, 2009, the Tribunal’s Registrar sent the applicant a letter by regular mail, which stated that she had not responded to the Tribunal’s request for dates with respect to rescheduling the hearing. The letter further stated: “If you do not respond within ten days of the date of this letter, the Tribunal will deem you to have abandoned the Application and close the file.”

5On September 21, 2009, a Tribunal staff person called the applicant again. The applicant stated that she would write to the Registrar for an extension of time to provide her availability dates. On September 30, the staff person called the applicant and left another voicemail message for her.

6To date, the applicant has not provided the Tribunal with availability dates with respect to rescheduling the hearing.

7In the circumstances, the applicant is deemed to have abandoned the Application. Accordingly, the Application is dismissed.