Brackenbury v. Priszm LP, 2011 HRTO 1073

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Larry Brackenbury Applicant

-and-

Priszm LP by its General Partner Priszm Inc., Dave Potter, Ken Wilson and Sarjni Kumar Respondents

A N D B E T W E E N:

Larry Brackenbury Applicant

-and-

Priszm LP by its General Partner Priszm Inc. and Tracie Layton Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Naomi Overend Date: June 6, 2011 Citation: 2011 HRTO 1073 Indexed as: Brackenbury v. Priszm LP

1These Applications were joined by Interim Decision, 2010 HRTO 447, dated February 26, 2010. They were to be scheduled for hearing, but in the meantime Counsel for the corporate respondent, Priszm LP, advised that his client was covered by an Initial Order under the Companies’ Creditors’ Arrangement Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-36 (“CCAA”), which provides, among other things, a stay of proceedings until April 29, 2011. The parties agree that the stay has been extended until June 30, 2011.

2The Tribunal directed the applicant to advise if he wished to continue his Application as against Priszm LP and/or the individual respondents and to comment on the effect of the CCAA stay. The applicant filed written submissions in which he acknowledged that his Application as against Priszm LP was stayed while the CCAA stay was in effect. He has not pursued an application in the Superior Court of Justice of Ontario to lift the stay or otherwise taken steps to allow his Application to proceed.

3The applicant takes the position that even if he is ultimately unable to proceed against Priszm LP, he can still proceed against the individual respondents, who he asserts may be liable in their own right. However, he does not want to proceed against the individual respondents while the issue of Priszm LP’s status under the CCAA proceedings is uncertain.

4He has asked the Tribunal to hold his Application in abeyance against both the corporate and the individual respondents for a period of up to one year, with the possibility of a further extension, depending on the progress of the CCAA proceedings.

5The respondents did not file any submissions in response to the applicant’s request and the time for doing so has now passed.

6Accordingly, I make the following orders:

a. The Tribunal will hold this Application in abeyance for a period of up to one year from the date of this Interim Decision, until it is determined that the CCAA stay against Priszm LP is lifted or the proceedings under the CCAA have been resolved.

b. If the CCAA proceedings are not resolved within the year, the applicant can make a request in writing to the Tribunal (with a copy to the respondents) for an extension of the period in which it holds the Application in abeyance or a request in writing to proceed against the individual respondents, failing which the Application may be dismissed as abandoned.

7I am not seized.