minicounsel

Kishandra Gurung v. Lord Lansdowne Retirement Residence, 2009 HRTO 1854 — HRTO | minicounsel | minicounsel

November 3, 2009

Kishandra Gurung v. Lord Lansdowne Retirement Residence, 2009 HRTO 1854

Case Summary

The applicant filed a human rights application. The respondents requested and were granted an extension of time to file their Response, but failed to do so. The Tribunal issued an interim decision warning the respondents that failure to file a Response within 7 days may result in the Tribunal proceeding without further notice to them and deeming them to have accepted the allegations.

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Kishandra Gurung

Applicant

-and-

Lord Lansdowne Retirement Residence and Jennifer Sousa

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Judith Keene

Date: November 3, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 1854

Indexed as: Gurung v. Lord Lansdowne Retirement Residence

[1] The applicant filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), on June 5, 2009. The Application was served on the respondents.

[2] On August 28, 2009, the Tribunal received a request from the respondents for an extension of time to file their Response. The Tribunal granted and extension of time to September 11, 2009.

[3] To date, the respondents have neither filed a Response nor otherwise communicated with the Tribunal.

[4] A Tribunal application is a legal proceeding. If a violation of the Code is found the Tribunal may order a respondent to make monetary compensation or other forms of restitution to the applicant and to take steps to promote future compliance with the Code. Failure to file a response may lead to orders against a respondent without their participation. The respondents’ attention is drawn to Rule 5.5 of the Tribunal’s Rules which reads as follows:

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.

[5] If the respondents wish to participate in this proceeding, a Response must be filed by 7 days from the date of this Interim Decision. If the Response is not received by this date, the Tribunal shall proceed without further notice to the respondents, and may take any or all of the other steps set out in Rule 5.5.

[6] I am not seized of this matter.

Dated at Toronto, this 3^rd^ day of November, 2009.

“Signed by”

Judith Keene

Vice-chair