Anthony Doxtdator v. Office of the Children’s Lawyer, Deborah Stephens and Peggy Smith, 2010 HRTO 1692

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Anthony Doxtdator

Applicant

-and-

Office of the Children’s Lawyer, Deborah Stephens and Peggy Smith

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Kathleen Martin

Date: August 13, 2010

Citation: 2010 HRTO 1692

Indexed as: Doxtdator v. Office of the Children’s Lawyer

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 April 28, 2010. The date of the last event identified in the Application is April 22, 2009.

2On June 23, 2010, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (“NOID”) which indicated that it appeared the Application was outside of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction because:

The Application was filed more than one year after the last incident of discrimination described in your Application and you have not fully explained how the delay was incurred in good faith and why you believe no substantial prejudice will result to any person affected by the delay [s.34(1)]. See for example Thomas v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2009 HRTO 1582.

3In addition, the NOID directed that the applicant provide written submissions responding to the issues within thirty (30) days from June 23, 2010 and stated that if written submissions were not received, the Tribunal would make its decision based on the information in the Application or may consider the failure to respond as an abandonment and dismiss it for that reason.

4To date, the applicant has not responded to the letter or otherwise communicated with the Tribunal.

5In the circumstances, the applicant is deemed to have abandoned the Application. Accordingly, the Application is dismissed.