Japal v. Massilly North America, 2011 HRTO 300

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Christine Japal

Applicant

-and-

Massilly North America Inc., Sahadeo Persaud and

Contract Staffing Inc.

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Douglas Sanderson

Date: February 14, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 300

Indexed as: Japal v. Massilly North America

1The applicant filed an Application under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”) on January 14, 2010. She alleges workplace discrimination and harassment on the basis of sex, and sexual solicitation. The personal respondent and the corporate respondent, Massilly North America Inc. (“Massilly”) have filed separate Responses.

No Response

2The Application was made against only Massilly and the personal respondent. In Massilly’s Response, filed on May 25, 2010, it named an additional corporate respondent, Contract Staffing Inc. (“Contract Staffing”). The Tribunal issued a Notice of Application to Contract Staffing on June 21, 2010 requiring a Response within 35 days. The Tribunal’s correspondence was not returned, but Contract Staffing did not file a response. In an Interim Decision, dated August 20, 2010, 2010 HRTO 1727, the Tribunal gave Contract Staffing seven days to file a Response and warned it of the potential consequences of not responding, pursuant to Rule 5.5. of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure.

3According to Tribunal records, the Interim Decision was returned as undeliverable at the address provided for Contract Staffing, with the notation “moved”. In a second Interim Decision, 2010 HRTO 2203, dated November 3, 2010, the Tribunal directed Massilly to provide the Tribunal with accurate contact information for Contract Staffing within two weeks of the Interim Decision.

4Massilly complied with the Tribunal’s direction by obtaining a Corporate Profile Report (“the Report”) regarding Contract Staffing. According to the Report, Contract Staffing remains active and the address provided by Massilly in its Response is the registered office address. Massilly also presented evidence that, notwithstanding the Report, Contract Staffing moved from that location several months ago. The Report, however, also identified the only listed director of Contract Staffing and provided his address.

5The Tribunal sent the Application to the director’s address on December 14, 2010 and gave Contract Staffing 35 days to file a Response. As of the date of this Interim Decision, Contract Staffing has not filed a Response.

6An 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 Contract Staffing’s attention is again 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.

7Massilly has provided an address for the director of the respondent, Contract Staffing. The Tribunal shall send a copy of this Interim Decision to the director of Contract Staffing by regular mail and courier.

8If Contract Staffing wishes to participate in this proceeding, it shall file a Response by February 21, 2011, together with an explanation of why the Response was not filed in accordance with the Notice of Application. If a Response is not received, the Tribunal may proceed without further notice to Contract Staffing and may take any or all of the steps set out in Rule 5.5.

9I am not seized of this matter.