Inderdai Dyall v. Priszm Inc., 2011 HRTO 1080

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Inderdai Dyall

Applicant

-and-

Priszm Inc.

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Naomi Overend

Date: June 6, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 1080

Indexed as: Dyall v. Priszm Inc.

1The applicant filed an Application on July 22, 2010 alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, contrary to the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”). The matter was scheduled to proceed to mediation but before that happened the respondent obtained 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. Currently, that stay has been extended to June 30, 2011.

2The Tribunal directed the applicant to advise the respondent and the Tribunal if she wished to continue her Application as against Priszm Inc. The applicant indicated in her submissions that she acknowledges that the CCAA stay had the effect of staying her Application, and that she has not pursued an application in the Superior Court of Justice of Ontario to lift the stay or otherwise taken steps to allow her Application to proceed.

3She requests that her Application be stayed until such time as the CCAA stay is lifted. The respondent submits that its assets will eventually be sold, and that there is no benefit in maintaining the stay and requiring it to regularly update the Tribunal on the progress of the CCAA stay. It does not, however, point to any authority by which the Tribunal can dismiss the Application where the outcome of the CCAA proceedings is not manifest.

4Accordingly, the Tribunal orders that this Application be stayed until the stay imposed by the Superior Court of Justice’s order under the CCAA is no longer in effect. Within 30 days of the lifting or expiration of the stay by the Court, the applicant shall advise the Tribunal, in writing, (with a copy to the respondent) of the lifting or expiration of the stay by the Court, and in the same correspondence the applicant shall advise the Tribunal and the respondent whether she intends to proceed with this Application, failing which the Application shall be deemed to have been abandoned.

5I am not seized.