minicounsel

Scruton v. Wabco Freight Car Products, 2011 HRTO 1392 — HRTO | minicounsel | minicounsel

July 26, 2011

Scruton v. Wabco Freight Car Products, 2011 HRTO 1392

Case Summary

The applicant filed an application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code. Following an earlier interim decision declining to defer the matter, the respondent was directed to file a response but failed to do so. The Tribunal issued an interim decision warning the respondent of the potential consequences of failing to participate under Rule 5.5 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure. The Tribunal directed the respondent to file a response within 10 days, along with an explanation for the delay, failing which the Tribunal may proceed without further notice.

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Eric Scruton

Applicant

-and-

Wabco Freight Car Products

Respondent

INTERIM decision

Adjudicator: Ian R. Mackenzie

Date: July 26, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 1392

Indexed as: Scruton v. Wabco Freight Car Products

[1] The applicant filed this Application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"), on February 22, 2011.

[2] On May 12, 2011, the Tribunal issued an Interim Decision ([2011 HRTO 922](https://www.minicounsel.ca/hrto/2011/922)) declining to defer the Application at the time due to another proceeding before the Financial Services Commission of Ontario. In the Interim Decision, I stated that no submissions had been received from the applicant. On May 31, 2011, the applicant advised the Tribunal that written submissions had been submitted. It appears that the submissions were not placed in the Application file through an administrative oversight of the Tribunal. In his submissions, the applicant stated his position that the Application should not be deferred.

[3] On May 12, 2011 the Tribunal sent the respondent a notice that the Application would be proceeding and that the respondent was directed to file its Response by June 16, 2011.

[4] As of the date of this Interim Decision the respondent has not filed a Response, nor has the Tribunal's correspondence to it been returned.

[5] An application to the Tribunal starts a legal proceeding. A finding that a violation of the Code has occurred may lead to various orders, including monetary compensation, other forms of restitution to the applicant, and orders to take action to promote compliance with the Code. Failure to file a response or participate in a Tribunal proceeding may lead to orders against individual and corporate respondents without their participation. The respondent's attention is drawn to Rule 5.5 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure which reads as follows:

5.5 Where an Application is delivered to a Respondent who does not respond to the Application, the Tribunal may:

a) deem the Respondent to have accepted all of the allegations in the Application;

b) proceed to deal with the Application without further notice to the Respondent;

c) deem the Respondent to have waived all rights with respect to further notice or participation in the proceeding;

d) decide the matter based only on the material before the Tribunal.

[6] The applicant has provided an address, email, and fax number for the respondent and the respondent's counsel. The Tribunal shall send a copy of this Interim Decision to the respondent and its counsel by regular mail, fax, and email.

[7] If the respondent wishes to participate in this proceeding, it shall file a Response with the Tribunal within 10 days of the date of this Interim Decision, together with an explanation of why the Response was not filed in accordance with the notice that the Application would be proceeding. If a Response is not received, the Tribunal may proceed without further notice to the respondent and may take any or all of the steps set out in Rule 5.5.

[8] I am not seized of this matter.

Dated at Toronto, this 26th day of July, 2011.

"signed by"_________________

Ian R. Mackenzie

Vice-chair