HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Rezbeh Jasavala

Applicant

-and-

Frank Slywka

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Douglas Sanderson

Date: January 24, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 161

Indexed as: Jasavala v. Slywka

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 October 8, 2010. The Tribunal issued a Notice of Application and attempted to deliver the Application to the respondent by regular mail at the address provided by the applicant. The envelope was stamped “Return to Sender, Moved/Unknown” and “No Unit” was written beside the street name on the envelope, before it was returned to the Tribunal.

2The Tribunal wrote to the applicant on November 12, 2010, advising the applicant that it cannot process the Application without an accurate address for the respondent, and requiring the applicant to provide an address that the applicant can demonstrate is current, complete and accurate. The Tribunal’s letter contained information with respect to Rule 6.6 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure and a reference to the Applicant’s Guide which provides examples of how contact information can be found or verified.

3The applicant provided the Tribunal with another address for the respondent on November 29, 2010. On December 1, 2010, the Tribunal again issued a Notice of Application, again attempting to deliver it to the respondent. This second Notice was also returned and marked “Return to Sender, Moved/Unknown”.

[4] The Tribunal relies on applicants to provide a correct address for respondents named in their applications. See, for example, Guild v. Kyle-Jansen, 2008 HRTO 347. Rule 6.6(b) provides that the Tribunal will not deal with an application in respect of a respondent who cannot be contacted at the contact information provided by the applicant.

5In an Interim Decision, 2010 HRTO 2525, dated December 22, 2010, the Tribunal made the following order:

a. If the applicant wishes to proceed with this Application, the applicant shall, within 20 days of the date of this Interim Decision, provide a current, complete and accurate address for the respondent and explain the steps taken to ensure that the address is current, complete and accurate; and

b. If the applicant believes that any address previously provided is in fact current, complete and accurate contact information for the respondent, then the applicant shall provide the reasons for that belief, and the steps taken to verify that the address is current, complete and accurate.

[6] As of the date of this Decision, the applicant has not complied with the Tribunal’s order. In the circumstances, the applicant is deemed to have abandoned the Application and the Application is dismissed.