HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Sandra Travers
Applicant
-and-
Composites Canada, a Division of FFO Fiberglass Inc.
Respondent
DECISION
Adjudicator: Brian Cook
Indexed as: Travers v. Composites Canada
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Composites Canada, a Division of FFO Fiberglass Inc., Respondent
Phanny Im, Counsel
1On March 26, 2012, the applicant filed an Application under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, alleging discrimination in employment because of disability, sex and age.
2The Application was delivered to the respondent which filed a full Response, denying the allegations in the Application.
3On June 27, 2012, the applicant filed a Request to Withdraw an Application (“the Request”).
4In accordance with the Tribunal’s Rules the Request was delivered to the respondent. The respondent responded to the Request. The respondent consents to the withdrawal of the Application but seeks an order from the Tribunal pursuant to section 17.1 of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, that the applicant pay all or part of the respondent’s costs in respect of the Application.
5Section 17.1 of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990, c S.22, provides as follows:
17.1 (1) Subject to subsection (2), a tribunal may, in the circumstances set out in rules made under subsection (4), order a party to pay all or part of another party’s costs in a proceeding.
(2) A tribunal shall not make an order to pay costs under this section unless,
a) the conduct or course of conduct of a party has been unreasonable, frivolous or vexatious or a party has acted in bad faith; and
b) the tribunal has made rules under subsection (4).
(3) The amount of the costs ordered under this section shall be determined in accordance with the rules made under subsection (4).
(4) A tribunal may make rules with respect to,
a) the ordering of costs;
b) the circumstances in which costs may be ordered; and
c) the amount of costs or the manner in which the amount of costs is to be determined.
6This section applies only if the Tribunal has made a rule with respect to the ordering of costs. The Tribunal has not made a rule with respect to the ordering of costs. The Tribunal does not otherwise have authority or jurisdiction to award costs in circumstances such as this: Dunn v. United Transportation Union, Local 104, 2008 HRTO 405.
ORDER
7The applicant’s request to withdraw the Application is granted.
8The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to award costs in the circumstances of this case.
Dated at Toronto, this 5th day of July, 2012.
Signed by
Brian Cook
Vice-chair