Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
Between:
Muntaha Hannona Applicant
-and-
1505378 Ontario Inc. o/a Downtown Group Towing and Storage and Toronto Police Services Board Respondents
Interim Decision
Adjudicator: Brian Cook Date: June 18, 2012 Citation: 2012 HRTO 1194 Indexed as: Hannona v. 1505378 Ontario Inc.
Appearances
Muntaha Hannona, Applicant Self-represented
Toronto Police Services Board, Respondent Andrea Denovan, Counsel
Downtown Group Towing & Storage, Respondent No one appearing
Introduction
1This is an Application filed under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), alleging discrimination with respect to services because of disability and ethnic origin.
2The Application arises out of events on December 22, 2010. The applicant, who resides in Barrie, was in Toronto having dinner at a restaurant on Danforth Avenue. She had parked her car on Danforth Avenue at approximately 3:30 in the afternoon and put money in the parking meter to cover the time she anticipated she would be parked. At approximately 5:00 she finished dinner and went to find her car and discovered that it had been ticketed by a police officer and towed by the respondent Downtown Group Towing & Storage (“Downtown Towing”).
3When she went to the Downtown Towing’s compound, she alleges that she was discriminated against by the employees she interacted with and in fact sustained physical injuries in the process of retrieving her car.
4I issued a Case Assessment Direction dated March 23, 2012. It reads in part:
In my view the most just and expeditious approach is to schedule a hearing by telephone conference call. During the conference call, the following matters will be discussed:
Should the Application against the Toronto Police Services Board be dismissed because there is no reasonable prospect that the Application against the Toronto Police Services Board can succeed because the allegations and complaints against the Toronto Police Services Board are not matters that are covered by the Code?
Should the Application against the Toronto Police Services Board be dismissed because the substance of the Application against the Toronto Police Services Board has been appropriately dealt with?
How should the Application against Downtown Group Towing & Storage be resolved? This could include a discussion about trying mediation.
5The summary hearing was heard by telephone conference call on June 8, 2012. The applicant and the respondent Toronto Police Services Board participated. The respondent Downtown Towing did not appear.
6On June 7, 2012, the day before the summary hearing, Downtown Towing’s representative sent a fax to the Tribunal advising that Downtown Towing is in Receivership and would not be participating in the summary hearing. The fax includes a “Certificate of Filing of a Notice of Intention to Make a Proposal” from the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy Canada in regard to 1505378 Ontario Inc. The Notice states: “[A]ll proceedings against the aforementioned insolvent person are stayed as of the date of filing of the Notice of Intention.” The Notice is dated April 11, 2011.
7At the summary hearing, I noted that the fact that Downtown Towing was not participating would not preclude dealing with the issues in respect of the Toronto Police Services Board. The applicant and Ms. Denovan, on behalf of the Toronto Police Services Board agreed.
8As noted in the Case Assessment Direction, the summary hearing process is outlined in Rule 19A of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure. In a summary hearing, the issue is whether the Application should be dismissed in whole or in part on the basis that there is no reasonable prospect that the Application or a part thereof will succeed.
9In Dabic v. Windsor Police Service, 2010 HRTO 1994, the Tribunal made the following observations on the type of inquiry that may be involved in a summary hearing:
In some cases, the issue at the summary hearing may be whether, assuming all the allegations in the application to be true, it has a reasonable prospect of success. In these cases, the focus will generally be on the legal analysis and whether what the applicant alleges may be reasonably considered to amount to a Code violation.
In other cases, the focus of the summary hearing may be on whether there is a reasonable prospect that the applicant can prove, on a balance of probabilities, that his or her [Code](https://www.canlii