Reilley v. McPhadden, 2011 HRTO 661

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Michael Reilley Applicant

• and -

Brian McPhadden Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Ena Chadha Date: April 6, 2011 Citation: 2011 HRTO 661 Indexed as: Reilley v. McPhadden

1The applicant filed an Application under section 34 of the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended, (the "Code") on January 19, 2011, alleging discrimination and reprisal with respect to services, goods and facilities on the basis of disability. The Application indicates that the respondent is a lawyer who previously represented the applicant as part of a class action settlement, a settlement which the applicant now opposes.

2On February 17, 2011, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss to the applicant. The Notice indicated that the Application appeared to be outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction because the respondent is a lawyer for another party in another proceeding and the issues raised in the Application relate to the conduct of a lawyer representing a party in another legal proceeding. The Notice referred the applicant to the Tribunal jurisprudence which has stated that the relationship between a lawyer and an opposing party is not covered by the Code: Belso v. York Region Police, 2009 HRTO 757; Cooper v. Pinkofskys, 2008 HRTO 390.

3The Tribunal's Notice directed the applicant to provide written submissions no later than 30 days from the date of the letter addressing the issue of jurisdiction. The Tribunal further advised that if the applicant did not file written submissions by that deadline the Tribunal may make its decision based only on the information in the Application and or may consider the failure to respond as an abandonment of the Application.

4The applicant did not file submissions with respect to the issue of the Tribunal's jurisdiction and the timeline for doing so has elapsed.

5In the circumstances, the applicant is deemed to have abandoned the Application. The Application is dismissed.