Moyal v. Toronto (City), 2010 HRTO 2220

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

David Moyal

Applicant

-and-

City of Toronto

Respondent

AND BETWEEN:

David Moyal

Applicant

-and-

Walmer Flats Property Management

Respondent

INTERIM decision

Adjudicator: Sherry Liang

Date: November 4, 2010

Citation: 2010 HRTO 2220

Indexed as: Moyal v. Toronto (City)

Reasons for Decision

1The applicant filed these Applications under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended, (the "Code") on May 27, 2010. The issues in dispute appear to overlap and the two Applications will proceed together to mediation if the respondents consent to mediate the dispute.

2The respondent in Tribunal File 2010-05765-I ("Toronto") has filed its Response and the applicant's time for filing an Reply to the Toronto Response has now passed.

3The respondent in Tribunal File 2010-05766-I ("Walmer") has not filed a Response. On July 21, 2010 the Tribunal issued a Notice of Application to Walmer in which it advised that a Response must be filed with the Tribunal not later than 35 days from the date of the Notice.

4On September 8, 2010 counsel for Walmer emailed the Registrar to request an extension of time to file the Response and to advise that Walmer is not a legal entity, and therefore not a proper respondent to the Application, and the address provided for service on Walmer was incorrect.

5By letter dated September 10, 2010 the Registrar granted Walmer an extension to file its Response until September 17, 2010. As of the date of this Interim Decision Walmer has not filed a Response, nor has the Tribunal's correspondence with it been returned.

6An 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. Walmer'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.

7The applicant has provided an address for Walmer and Walmer's counsel has provided an address and an email. The Tribunal shall send a copy of this Interim Decision to Walmer and its counsel by regular mail, courier and email.

8If Walmer wishes to participate in this proceeding, it shall file a Response with the Tribunal within 10 days of the date of this Interim Decision, together with an explanation of why the Response was not filed in accordance with the Notice of Application. If a Response is not received, the Tribunal may proceed without further notice to Walmer and may take any or all of the steps set out in Rule 5.5.

9I am not seized of this matter.