Cort v. Suncor Energy, 2011 HRTO 291

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Loma Cort acting as the Estate of Lorne Cort also known as Eric Johns

Applicant

-and-

Suncor Energy Inc. (formerly Petro Canada)

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Naomi Overend

Date: February 11, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 291

Indexed as: Cort v. Suncor Energy

1This Interim Decision deals with the applicant’s Request for Order to add Great West Life as a respondent to this Application. This Application was filed on November 22, 2009, alleging discrimination and harassment in employment contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”).

2The applicant filed a Request for Order During Proceedings (Form 10) on December 1, 2010 asking to amend the Application to include the additional respondent. The applicant’s Statement of Delivery (Form 23) indicates that the Form 10 was served on the named respondent, but not on Great West Life, the proposed respondent.

3Counsel for Suncor filed a Response to the Request for Order (Form 11) objecting to the addition of Great West Life at this juncture, in part, because Great West Life apparently had no notice of the Request. The applicant has not since filed anything with the Tribunal indicating that Great West Life has, in fact, received notice.

4The test for adding respondents has been articulated at paragraph 12 in the Tribunal’s decision Smyth v. Toronto Police Services Board, 2009 HRTO 1513.

When determining a request to add a respondent, the Tribunal should consider the following three questions:

(1) Are there allegations made that could support a finding that the proposed respondent violated the Code?

(2) If the proposed respondent is an individual and an organization is also named, is there a compelling reason to include him or her as a respondent?

(3) Would it be fair, in all the circumstances, to add the proposed respondent?

5Applying the third part of this test, it would not be fair to Great West Life to add it as a respondent to these proceedings at this juncture in view of the applicant’s failure to serve the proposed respondent with the Form 10 or otherwise provide it with notice of the request. Accordingly, the request to add Great West Life as a respondent to these proceedings is denied.

6I am not seized of this matter.