Pollard v. 748161 Ontario, 2010 HRTO 1681

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Richard Pollard

Applicant

-and-

748161 Ontario Inc., Peter Stam, Gerrit Bouman and Gerwin Bauman

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Sheri D. Price

Date: August 12, 2010

Citation: 2010 HRTO 1681

Indexed as: Pollard v. 748161 Ontario

1This Interim Decision addresses the respondents’ failure to file a Response to the Application filed by the applicant under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, (the “Code”).

2On January 29, 2010, the Tribunal sent the Application to the respondents by regular mail at the address for them provided by the applicant, together with a direction to respond no later than thirty five (35) days from that date, in accordance with the Tribunal Rules. Under Rule 1.22 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure, a document delivered by mail is deemed received five days after the postmark date. The address provided by the applicant for the corporate respondent and the three personal respondents was the business address for the corporate respondent.

3None of the respondents have filed Responses to the Application within the time frame permitted by the Tribunal’s Rules. The Tribunal’s correspondence to the respondents has not been returned.

4On July 19, 2010, the Tribunal wrote to the applicant to advise that, in light of the fact that none of the respondents had filed a Response to the Application, it could not deal with the Application until the applicant took further steps to satisfy the Tribunal that contact information which he had provided for the respondents was current, complete and accurate.

5In his August 4, 2010 correspondence to the Tribunal, the applicant submits that the addresses originally provided in the Application for the respondents is current, complete and accurate. He provides two reasons for his belief in this regard.

6First, in February 2010, the corporate respondent and the personal respondent, Peter Stam, emailed counsel for the applicant their “response” to the applicant’s “claim”. The email responds substantively to the allegations in the Application and also indicates that the corporate respondent, previously identified as Stam Nurseries Inc., is now called “748161 Ontario Inc.” Another email was sent to counsel for the applicant by Gerrit Bouman. This email was also in response to the applicant’s “claim”. The applicant submits that he misspelled Mr. Bouman’s name in the Application, incorrectly identifying him as “Garit Bauman”. Mr. Bouman’s email also responds substantively to the applicant’s allegations in his email. There is no email or other response to the Application from the personal respondent “Gerwin Bauman”.

7In addition, the applicant advises that he conducted a corporate search in August 2010 which revealed that the business address for the corporate respondent is essentially the same as that originally provided in the Application. Although the Line number and the Rural Route number were reversed in the address originally provided, this does not appear to have prevented the Tribunal’s correspondence from being delivered to the respondents, in light of their emails to counsel for the applicant. The applicant confirms that, according to the corporate search, Stam Nurseries Inc. has changed its name to 748161 Ontario Inc.

8Based on the materials in the file, and in particular the emails referenced above, the Tribunal is satisfied that the Application came to the attention of the corporate respondent, now correctly identified as 748161 Ontario Inc., and the personal respondent Peter Stam. The Tribunal is also satisfied that the Application came to the attention of Gerrit Bouman, and, as submitted by the applicant, that this is the correct spelling of the personal respondent originally identified in the Application as “Garit Bouman”. The style of cause is hereby amended to reflect the correct name for the corporate respondent and the personal respondent Gerrit Bouman.

9A Tribunal Application is a legal proceeding, which, if a violation of the Code is found, 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 may lead to orders against respondents without further notice or their participation. The respondents’ 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.

10The Tribunal shall send a copy of this Interim Decision by regular mail and courier to the attention of the respondents at the slightly revised address for the respondents provided by the applicant following the August 2010 corporate search.

11If the respondents wish to participate in this proceeding, they shall file their Responses to the Application with the Tribunal by August 20, 2010, together with an explanation why their Responses were not filed by the deadline in accordance with the Tribunal’s Rules. If a Response is not received by this date, the Tribunal shall proceed without further notice to any respondent who has not filed a Response to the Application, and may take any or all of the other steps set out in Rule 5.5.

12The corporate respondent and the personal respondents Peter Stam and Gerrit Bouman are directed to immediately provide a copy of this Interim Decision and the Application to the personal respondent identified as Gerwin Bauman. As with the other respondents, Mr. Gerwin Bauman is directed to file his Response to the Application by no later than August 20, 2010 and to provide the correct spelling of his name in his Response.

13The Respondent’s Guide to Applications under the Code and the “Response to an Application under section 34 of the Code” form are available on the Tribunal’s website, www.hrto.ca, under “New” Applications.

14I am not seized of this matter.