HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Rachel Doucette
Applicant
-and-
Claybrooke Inc., Claybrooke Marketing Inc. and Patrick Sharp
Respondents
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Sherry Liang
Indexed as: Doucette v. Claybrooke Inc.
1This is an Application filed on November 14, 2008 under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended (the "Code"). A hearing has been scheduled in this matter for July 8, 2009.
2In the Tribunal's previous Interim Decision of May 5, 2009, the Tribunal granted the applicant's request to add Claybrooke Marketing Inc. as a respondent. I directed Claybrooke Marketing Inc. to file a Response within 14 days of the Interim Decision. This decision was sent to Claybrooke Inc. as well as Claybrooke Marketing Inc., both care of Ian Harvey. Mr. Harvey had previously identified himself as the representative of Claybrooke Inc. in the Response filed by Claybrooke Inc. He identified himself as the representative for Claybrooke Marketing Inc. through a Form 11 (Response to Request for Order) filed with the Tribunal on February 2, 2009.
3No Response from Claybrooke Marketing Inc. has been received by the Tribunal. 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 Claybrooke Marketing Inc.'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.
4Although Mr. Harvey has filed material in this Application on behalf of Claybrooke Marketing Inc., in other correspondence he states that Claybrooke Marketing Inc. is bankrupt and identifies, without providing contact information, the name of a trustee in bankruptcy. Unless the Tribunal is advised otherwise, it will continue to treat Mr. Harvey as the representative of Claybrooke Marketing Inc. The Tribunal shall send a copy of this Interim Decision to the respondent Claybrooke Marketing Inc., care of Ian Harvey. Mr. Harvey has provided a street address, email address, and two fax numbers. The Tribunal shall send a copy of this Interim Decision to Mr. Harvey by regular mail, courier and fax, to both fax numbers.
5Mr. Harvey is directed to provide a copy of this decision to the trustee in bankruptcy.
6If Claybrooke Marketing Inc. wishes to participate in this proceeding, it shall file a Response by June 23, 2009, together with an explanation of why the Response was not filed in accordance with the previous Interim Decision. If a Response is not received, the Tribunal may proceed without further notice to Claybrooke Marketing Inc. and may take any or all of the steps set out in Rule 5.5.
7The Tribunal notes that in its correspondence to the Tribunal, Claybrooke Inc. continues to maintain that is not the proper respondent to the Application. It was invited to file a Form 10, Request for Order, requesting that it be removed as a respondent, but has not done so. The process of filing a Form 10 allows other parties to signify their consent or objection to the request, and make submissions on the request.
In the circumstances, and absent a Form 10, the issue raised by Claybrooke Inc. will be dealt with by the Tribunal at the hearing.
Dated at Toronto, this 9^th^ day of June, 2009.
"Signed By"
Sherry Liang
Vice-chair