Bortolin v. Bowater Canadian Forest Products Inc., 2011 HRTO 522

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Ricky Bortolin

Applicant

-and-

Bowater Canadian Forest Products Inc.

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Mark Hart

Date: March 15, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 522

Indexed as: Bortolin v. Bowater Canadian Forest Products

1This is an Application made under s. 53(3) of the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), dated November 19, 2008. The underlying complaint was filed with the Ontario Human Rights Commission (the “Commission”) on December 21, 2006.

2On April 20, 2009, the Tribunal was advised by respondent counsel that the respondent Bowater Canadian Forest Products Inc. (“Bowater”) had obtained relief from its creditors pursuant to the Companies’ Creditors Arrangements Act, R.W.C. 1985, c. C-36 (“CCAA”). By order of Justice Gascon dated April 17, 2009, a stay was granted of all proceedings against Bowater and its affiliates. This stay was renewed by court order several times over the ensuing period.

3On February 11, 2011, the Tribunal was advised by respondent counsel that Bowater had emerged from CCAA protection as of December 9, 2010. The Tribunal was further advised that respondent counsel had consulted with the court-appointed Monitor and its solicitors regarding the status of the Application before this Tribunal. Attached to this letter was correspondence from counsel for the Monitor with regard to the status of this Application as a result of the CCAA proceeding.

4As part of the court order issued in the CCAA proceeding, a claims procedure order was issued to address outstanding claims against Bowater and its affiliates. While the applicant did file a claim under the claims procedure order with regard to his outstanding wrongful dismissal action against Bowater, he did not file a claim with regard to this Application by the time of the claims bar date established under that order. As a result, Monitor’s counsel takes the position that the claim asserted by the applicant in this Application has been compromised and is now barred as a consequence of the court order. Counsel for the Monitor cites AbitibiBowater Inc., Re, 2010 QCCS 1261, 2010 CarswellQue 2812 (S.C.) at paras. 229-230 for the proposition that claims under human rights legislation, even if the claim has not yet been ascertained and is contested, are nonetheless compromised if they are not filed and assessed in accordance with the claims procedure order. As a result of the position taken by Monitor’s counsel, counsel for the respondent takes the position that the Application should be dismissed.

5On February 25, 2011, the Tribunal sent correspondence to the parties acknowledging the respondent’s position that the Application has been compromised as a result of the CCAA proceeding and should therefore be dismissed. The applicant was invited to make any submissions in response to the respondent’s position within 14 calendar days of the Tribunal’s letter, failing which the Application may be dismissed as abandoned.

6The period for the applicant to make submissions expired on March 1, 2011, and no submissions were filed. Accordingly, the Tribunal determines that this Application has been abandoned.

7For all of these reasons, the Application is dismissed.