Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
B E T W E E N:
Melisa Cerna Applicant
-and-
Extendicare (Elm Management) and Linda Davult Respondents
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: David A. Wright Date: May 20, 2011 Citation: 2011 HRTO 973 Indexed as: Cerna v. Extendicare (Elm Management)
1The applicant filed this Application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended, (the "Code") on February 23, 2011.
2On March 28, 2011 the Tribunal issued a Notice of Application to the respondents in which it directed that a Response to the Application must be filed with the Tribunal not later than May 2, 2011.
3As of the date of this Interim Decision the respondents have not filed a Response, nor has the Tribunal's correspondence to it been returned.
4An 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 respondents' attention is 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.
5The applicant has provided an address for the respondents. The Tribunal shall send a copy of this Interim Decision to the respondents by regular mail and courier.
6If the respondents wish to participate in this proceeding, they shall file a Response with the Tribunal within 10 days of the date of this Interim Decision, 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 the respondents and may take any or all of the steps set out in Rule 5.5.
7I am not seized of this matter.
Dated at Toronto, this 20^th^ day of May, 2011.
"Signed by"
___________________________________
David A. Wright Associate Chair