Sammy Johnson v. Smurfit Stone Container Corporation, 2009 HRTO 2093

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Sammy Johnson

Applicant

-and-

Smurfit Stone Container Corporation

Respondent

interim DECISION

Adjudicator: David Muir

Date: December 3, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 2093

Indexed as: Johnson v. Smurfit Stone Container

1This is an Application filed on March 23, 2009 pursuant to section 53(5) of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (‘the Code”).

2The respondent company submits that the Application is stayed or suspended pursuant to Orders made by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-36 (the “CCAA”). By letter dated October 19, 2009, the Tribunal requested that the respondents provide it with information respecting the status of the stay and the name of the trustee in bankruptcy. The company appears to be under CCAA protection as a result of a series of Orders from the Ontario Court until, at this stage, December 24, 2009.

3The purpose of this Interim Decision is to provide further directions regarding the continuation of this proceeding.

4In the circumstances, the Tribunal requests that the applicant provide his submissions, if any, with respect to the stay within 30 days of the date of this Interim Decision. The respondents may respond to those submissions within ten days of receiving them.

5Alternatively, if the applicant agrees that the CCAA order stays his Application, he must advise the Tribunal within 30 days of the date of this letter whether he has commenced an application in the Superior Court to lift the stay so as to allow the Application to proceed, or has sought the consent of the respondent and monitor to having the Application proceed. If the applicant obtains leave of the Court to continue with his Application, he should advise the Tribunal in writing within 20 days of obtaining leave.

6Upon receipt of the applicant’s submissions, the Tribunal may issue further directions. If the applicant does not communicate with the Tribunal by November 30, 2010, the Application may be dismissed as abandoned.

7The Tribunal further directs that the respondent advise the applicant in writing of any extensions to the Stay Period that may be granted by the Court pending further direction from the Tribunal.

8A copy of this Interim Decision will be provided to the trustee in bankruptcy.

Failure to serve Individual Respondents

9The Tribunal also requested the parties provide his submissions whether the applicant may proceed against the individual respondents. The applicant has filed no submissions with respect to this issue.

10The applicant has not filed Form C’s indicating that any of the individual respondents have been served with his Application. Neither has he made any submissions that the Application ought to be continued as against any of the three individuals named. In all of the circumstances, I find that it is appropriate to dismiss the Application as against the three named individuals and the style of cause is amended accordingly.

11I am not seized of this matter.