Denver Sanmuganathan v. SKD Automotive Group, Milton Division, 2010 HRTO 2239

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Denver Sanmuganathan

Applicant

-and-

SKD Automotive Group, Milton Division

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: David A. Wright

Date: November 9, 2010

Citation: 2010 HRTO 2239

Indexed as: Sanmuganathan v. SKD Automotive Group

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 November 24, 2008.

2Processing of the Application was stayed as a result of the respondent filing for protection under the Companies Creditors’ Arrangement Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-36, as amended. The respondent subsequently went into receivership and all proceedings were stayed pursuant to the receivership order.

3On April 23, 2010, the applicant filed a Request for Order During Proceedings seeking to proceed with his Application. On June 1, 2010, the Tribunal issued an Interim Decision, 2010 HRTO 1232, dismissing the applicant’s Request in the absence of an order from the Court lifting the stay and permitting the applicant to proceed against the respondent. The applicant was directed to advise the Tribunal of his intentions with respect to his Application within 30 days of the date of the Interim Decision and warned that failure to do so could result in dismissal of the Application as abandoned.

4On June 15, 2010, the applicant advised the Tribunal he was still pursuing the matter. By a Case Assessment Direction dated July 22, 2010, he was given until August 27, 2010, to show he had commenced a motion to have the stay lifted. He was advised that if he did not do so the Application could be deemed abandoned.

5As of the date of this Decision, the applicant has not responded to the Tribunal and the Tribunal’s correspondence has not been returned.

6In the circumstances, the applicant is deemed to have abandoned the Application and the Application is dismissed.