Sheikh v. 143005 Ontario Inc., 2011 HRTO 1264

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Wajahat Sheikh

Applicant

-and-

143005 Ontario Inc. o/a Travel and Tours Experts

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: David A. Wright

Date: June 30, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 1264

Indexed as: Sheikh v. 143005 Ontario Inc.

1This is an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, filed on December 19, 2009, alleging discrimination with respect to goods, services and facilities.

2The respondent is a travel agency. On February 19, 2010, the Application was delivered to the respondent at the address provided by the applicant in his Application. The Tribunal’s letter was not returned.

3On July 14, 2010, the applicant wrote to the Tribunal, providing an updated address for the respondent and stating that he had hand delivered the Application to the respondent. He also stated that he wished to add the contact person for the respondent, Mohammed Ali, as an individual respondent. He stated that the proposed individual respondent had informed him that the business had closed and was now operating as a different legal entity, but did not provide the name of the new entity. The applicant did not provide a contact address for Mr. Ali nor did he file a Request for Order to add Mr. Ali as a respondent.

4On July 20, 2010, the Tribunal issued an Interim Decision, 2010 HRTO 1566, directing the respondent to respond to the Application. The Interim Decision was sent by both mail and courier to the corporate respondent at both addresses provided by the applicant. All copies were returned to the Tribunal as undeliverable.

5On April 8, 2011 the Tribunal wrote to the applicant to advise that the Tribunal was unable to contact the respondent at the addresses provided by the applicant. It noted the applicant’s responsibility to provide the Tribunal with accurate contact information, and noted that under Rule 6.6 (b) an Application will not be dealt with in respect of a respondent that cannot be contacted at the addresses provided in the Application.

6The letter directed the applicant to proceed as follows:

(a) within 20 days of the date of this Notice, provide current, complete and accurate addresses for the respondent[s] and explain the steps taken to ensure that the addresses are current, complete and accurate; and

(b) if you believe that the address previously provided in your Application is in fact current, complete and accurate contact information for the respondent, provide the reasons for that belief and the steps taken to verify that the address is current, complete and accurate.

7The letter went on to note that the HRTO’s Applicant’s Guide provide some examples of how contact information can be found or verified. It notified the applicant that if he did not provide further documentation within 20 days of the date of the letter, the HRTO may decide to dismiss the Application.

8The applicant did not respond to the letter. Indeed, the applicant has not communicated with the Tribunal in any way since his e-mail of July 14, 2010.

9In the circumstances, the Application is dismissed as abandoned.