Karoline Bourdeau v. Kingston Bazar, 2011 HRTO 494

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Karoline Bourdeau

Applicant

-and-

Kingston Bazar

Respondent

INTERIM decision

Adjudicator: Judith Keene

Date: March 10, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 494

Indexed as: Bourdeau v. Kingston Bazar

1The applicant filed an Application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, (the “Code”) on June 16, 2010.

2On November 4, 2010, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Application to the respondent. The respondent was advised that a Response must be filed with the Tribunal by December 9, 2011.

3On January 24, 2011, the Tribunal issued Interim Decision 2011 HRTO 158 (“the first Interim Decision”). The first Interim Decision noted the respondent’s failure to file a Response, and gave the respondent until February 3, 2011, to file a Response together with an explanation of why the Response was not filed in accordance with the original Notice of Application. The first Interim Decision quoted Rule 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.

4The Interim Decision stated that, if a Response was not received, the Tribunal might proceed without further notice to the respondent and could take any or all of the steps set out in Rule 5.5. The Tribunal sent a copy of the Interim Decision to the respondent by regular mail and courier. As of the date of this Interim Decision, the respondent has not filed a Response, nor has the Tribunal’s correspondence to it been returned.

5I am satisfied that the respondent has received notice of the Application and notice of the Tribunal’s Order directing it to file a Response. It appears that the respondent refuses or has chosen not to participate in these proceedings, notwithstanding notice of the implications of Rule 5.5. In the circumstances, the Tribunal orders that the respondent is deemed to have waived all rights with respect to further notice or participation in the proceeding.

6The Tribunal will proceed without the participation of the respondent, deems the respondent to have waived its right to participate pursuant to Rule 5.5(c) and further deems the respondents to have accepted all of the allegations set out in the Application pursuant to Rule 5.5(a). Before the Tribunal finally determines the Application, the applicant will be provided an opportunity file any documents or materials she may wish the Tribunal to consider, and, if she requests the opportunity to do so, to make oral submissions via teleconference.

Order

7The following is ordered:

i) The respondent is deemed to have waived all rights to notice or participation in these proceedings and is further deemed to have accepted all of the allegations set out in the Application;

ii) Within four weeks of this Interim Decision, the applicant may submit any additional documents or materials she wishes the Tribunal to consider in deciding this Application, and the applicant should advise the Tribunal whether or not she wishes to make oral submissions, in via teleconference call before the Tribunal finally determines the Application;

8If the applicant advises that she does not have documentary materials to submit, or that she does not wish to make oral submissions, the Tribunal may issue further directions to the applicant if necessary, and will proceed to finally determine the Application, including deciding the appropriate remedy.

9I am not seized of this matter.