Schaub v. Parisien, 2010 HRTO 2275

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Michael Schaub

Applicant

-and-

Mark Parisien

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Mary Truemner

Date: November 12, 2010

Citation: 2010 HRTO 2275

Indexed as: Schaub v. Parisien

APPEARANCES

Michael Schaub, Applicant ) No one appearing

Mark Parisien, Respondent ) Appearing on his own behalf

ii

1This is an Application filed on July 29, 2009, under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, (the “Code”). The Application alleges discrimination with respect to employment on the basis of disability. The respondent denies the allegations.

2A hearing in this matter was scheduled for November 10, 2010. The Tribunal sent the applicant a Confirmation of Hearing notice by regular mail on July 6, 2010. The notice informed all parties that the Tribunal had scheduled a hearing of the Application on November 10, 2010 at 160 Elgin St., 11th Floor, Ottawa, commencing at 10:00 a.m. It was not returned as undeliverable. On October 12, 2010, the Tribunal sent the applicant a Case Assessment Direction which, amongst other things, reminded the parties that the hearing would take place on November 10, 2010. It was not returned as undeliverable.

3I am satisfied that the applicant had proper notice of the hearing.

4The personal respondent attended the hearing at the date, time, and place that was set out in the Confirmation of Hearing notice. The applicant did not appear. I delayed the commencement of the hearing until 10:30 a.m. The applicant still did not attend, and did not contact the Tribunal.

5At the hearing, I invited submissions from the respondent on how I should deal with the applicant’s failure to appear. The respondent requested that the Tribunal dismiss the Application.

DECISION

6The applicant commenced a legal proceeding when he filed his Application with the Tribunal. It is the applicant’s responsibility to participate in this proceeding by taking the necessary steps to pursue it, including attending the hearing scheduled to consider the allegations raised in the Application. In the absence of any correspondence or communication from the applicant to explain why he did not appear at the hearing, and as a result of his failure to appear and provide evidence in support of his allegations, the Application is dismissed.