Downer v. Little & Jarrett, 2010 HRTO 992

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Harold Downer

Applicant

-and-

Little & Jarrett and Anthony Little

Respondents

DECISION

Adjudicator: Michelle Flaherty

Date: May 5, 2010

Citation: 2010 HRTO 992

Indexed as: Downer v. Little & Jarrett

1This Application was filed on December 28, 2009, pursuant to s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"). It contains allegations of discrimination on the basis of race, colour and ethnic origin in the provision of goods, services, and facilities.

2The Application relates to incidents which allegedly occurred on November 21, 2008 and December 16, 2008. As it appeared that the Application was filed more than one year after the last incident of alleged discrimination, the Tribunal administratively issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss ("Notice"). The Tribunal invited submissions from the applicant as to whether the Application is within the Tribunal's power to decide pursuant to section 34 of the Code.

3Section 34 of the Code states:

(1) If a person believes that any of his or her rights under Part I have been infringed, the person may apply to the Tribunal for an order under section 45.2,

(a) within one year after the incident to which the application relates; or

(b) if there was a series of incidents, within one year after the last incident in the series.

(2) A person may apply under subsection (1) after the expiry of the time limit under that subsection if the Tribunal is satisfied that the delay was incurred in good faith and no substantial prejudice will result to any person affected by the delay.

4The applicant responded to the Notice on March 1, 2010. He states that the delay in filing the Application was due to health concerns, a trip to Africa and a court date.

5In an earlier Interim Decision, 2010 HRTO 721, the Tribunal stated that, based on the materials submitted, it was unable to determine whether the applicant's health concerns constitute a good faith reason for the twelve day delay in filing the Application. The Tribunal gave the applicant an opportunity to file additional submissions regarding his health concerns and how they relate to the twelve-day delay.

6The applicant filed submissions in which he states:

The Applicant submits at this time, health concerns is related to Diabetes. Should the Tribunal have any further query into health concerns and take the least intrusive approach. The Applicant is willing to give consent.

7I appreciate that the applicant has health concerns. However, although he has been given two opportunities to do so, he has not provided any information that could lead the Tribunal to conclude that his particular health concerns had any impact on his ability to file an Application within the limitation period set out in the Code.

8Accordingly, there is no basis upon which to conclude that the delay was in good faith. The Application is dismissed pursuant to section 34 of the Code.