HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Jay Brass
Applicant
-and-
Fairweather o/a INC Group and Geralyn Ocampo
Respondents
INTERIM decision
Adjudicator: Brian Eyolfson
Indexed as: Brass v. Fairweather
1The applicant filed an Application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, (the “Code”) on September 23, 2010.
2On October 20, 2010, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Application to the respondents. The respondents were advised that a Response must be filed with the Tribunal by November 24, 2010.
3As of the date of this Interim Decision, the respondents have not responded to the Application nor has the Tribunal’s correspondence been returned.
4An 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. 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.
5The applicant provided a mailing address for the respondents in his Application. The Interim Decision will be sent to the respondents at that address by mail and courier.
6If the respondents wish to participate in this proceeding, they 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 the respondents and may take any or all of the steps set out in Rule 5.5.
7I am not seized of this matter.
Dated at Toronto, this 7th day of December, 2010.
“Signed by”
Brian Eyolfson
Vice-chair

