Malika Mounir v. Brampton Neighbourhood Resource Centre and Anthony Hutchinson, 2011 HRTO 2187

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Malika Mounir

Applicant

-and-

Brampton Neighbourhood Resource Centre and Anthony Hutchinson

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Ken Bhattacharjee

Date: December 6, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 2187

Indexed as: Mounir v. Brampton Neighbourhood Resource Centre

1The applicant filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, on July 29, 2009.

2The first three hearing dates occurred on June 29 and 30, 2010, and January 26, 2011. The hearing continued on October 31 and November 1 and 2, 2011.

3On October 31, 2011, the applicant and the individual respondent appeared for the continuation of the hearing, but the organization respondent did not. The organization respondent did not contact the other parties or the Tribunal prior to the continuation of the hearing to explain why it would not be appearing.

4The applicant and the individual respondent informed the Tribunal that the organization may no longer be operating and may be insolvent, but had no definitive information to that effect.

5On the same day, the Tribunal issued an Interim Decision, 2011 HRTO 1964, which expressed concern that if the organization respondent is insolvent, proceedings under the Code against the organization respondent may be stayed pursuant to s. 69 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3, as amended, which provides that no creditor has any remedy against the insolvent person or the insolvent person’s property, or shall commence or continue any action, execution or other proceedings, for the recovery of a claim provable in bankruptcy.

6The Tribunal then made the following order:

• The organization respondent, or any applicable receiver or trustee that receives this Interim Decision, shall immediately inform the Tribunal and the other parties in writing, with supporting documentation, what the current status of the organization respondent is, and whether or not a stay is in effect with respect to the proceeding before this Tribunal against the organization respondent.

7On November 28, 2011, the Tribunal received a letter from Len Carby, the Chair of the Board of Directors of the organization respondent, which stated that the Board decided to end the organization respondent’s operations effective March 31, 2011, because of “insolvency”, and turned all financial decisions of the organization respondent over to the Royal Bank of Canada (“RBC”). The letter also stated that that status of the organization was now in the hands of RBC’s counsel (David G. Dunnet, Alloway and Associates).

8In the circumstances, the Tribunal orders Mr. Dunnet to comply with the order set out in paragraph 6 above within two weeks of the date of this Interim Decision. The Tribunal’s Registrar will include a copy of Mr. Carby’s letter with this Interim Decision.