Martinelle Crichlow v. Rogers Communications Inc., 2011 HRTO 256

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Martinelle Crichlow

Applicant

-and-

Rogers Communications Inc.

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Kathleen Martin

Date: February 10, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 256

Indexed as: Crichlow v. Rogers Communications

1This is an Application filed on April 28, 2010 under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended (the “Code”).

2On October 22, 2010, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (“the Notice”) in which it stated that it appeared the Application is outside of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction because the respondent appears to be a federal government department, agency or a federally regulated business or service. The Notice indicated that the applicant must provide written submissions responding to the aforementioned issue and file the same within 30 days of October 22, 2010. The Notice stated that if the applicant did not file written submissions by the required time, the Tribunal would make its decision based only on the information in the Application or may consider the failure to respond as an abandonment of the Application and dismiss it for that reason.”

3The Notice was sent to the person identified as the contact person for the Application at the address provided in the Application.

4The Tribunal has not received any submissions or other response from the applicant and the time period for doing so has elapsed.

6Having regard to the above I find that Application is abandoned. The Application is dismissed.