Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
B E T W E E N:
Sylvie Brochu Applicant
-and-
Micko’s Chips Stand Respondent
DECISION
Adjudicator: David A. Wright Date: July 6, 2011 Citation: 2011 HRTO 1284 Indexed as: Brochu v. Micko’s Chips Stand
1The applicant filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), on August 31, 2010, alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability.
2On January 24, 2011, the respondent filed a Response in which it denied the allegations of discrimination and asked that consideration of the Application be deferred pending the outcome of a Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (“WSIB”) matter involving the applicant. In its Response, the respondent stated that “[t]here is a case at the WSIB claim #25696282 that has denied her claim, but I believe she is in the process of appealing”.
3The applicant did not file a Reply and the time for doing so under the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure (“Rules”) has elapsed.
4By Interim Decision dated March 28, 2011 (2011 HRTO 597), the Tribunal noted that it was unclear whether the WSIB matter was ongoing or whether it had reached its conclusion. The Tribunal directed the applicant to, within two weeks of the date of the Interim Decision, file with the Tribunal and provide to the respondent written submissions regarding the status of the WSIB matter, and advise whether the WSIB matter is ongoing, including any ongoing appeal processes. The applicant was also directed to include with her submissions the complaint filed with the WSIB and any documents regarding the results or conclusion of the WSIB matter.
5On April 7, 2011, in response to the March 28, 2011 Interim Decision, the applicant filed written submissions advising that she is now represented in her WSIB matter by the Office of the Worker Advisor who is helping her contest the WSIB decision. The applicant did not, despite the Tribunal’s direction in the March 28, 2011 Interim Decision, include a copy of the complaint filed with the WSIB or any documents relating to the WSIB’s initial decision in the applicant’s matter.
6On May 11, 2011, the Tribunal issued a further Interim Decision (2011 HRTO 887), directing the applicant to, within one week of the Interim Decision, provide the respondent and file with the Tribunal the complaint filed with the WSIB and any documents regarding the results or conclusions of the WSIB matter. The May 11, 2011 Interim Decision advised the applicant that if she again failed to provide the WSIB complaint and the WSIB documents the Tribunal might dismiss the Application as abandoned or may defer the Application in accordance with its Rules.
7As of the date of this Decision, the applicant has not file the WSIB complaint or any documents regarding the results or conclusions of the WSIB matter and the time for doing so has now passed.
8In the circumstances, the applicant is deemed to have abandoned the Application.
9The Application is dismissed.
Dated at Toronto, this 6^th^ day of July, 2011.
”signed by”____________
David A. Wright Associate Chair