HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Wendy Beaumont

Applicant

-and-

City of Hamilton, Blaine Lucas and Timothy Spence

Respondents

INTERIM decision

Adjudicator: David Muir

Date: July 10, 2012

Citation: 2012 HRTO 1358

Indexed as: Beaumont v. Hamilton (City)

[1] The applicant filed an Application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), on March 9, 2012.

[2] On April 25, 2012, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Application to all the respondents in care of the organizational respondent. The respondents were advised that they must file a Response to the Application with the Tribunal by no later than May 30, 2012.

[3] The organizational respondent advised the Tribunal that it did not represent the personal respondent Timothy Spence and provided the Tribunal with Mr. Spence’s mailing address. On May 11, 2012, the Tribunal issued another Notice of Application to this personal respondent at this mailing address. The personal respondent was advised that he must file a Response to the Application with the Tribunal by no later than June 15, 2012.

[4] The organizational respondent requested and was granted an extension to file its response. It filed a Response to the Application on behalf of itself and the personal respondent Blaine Lucas on June 20, 2012.

[5] As of the date of this Interim Decision the personal respondent Timothy Spence has not filed a Response, nor has the Tribunal’s correspondence to him been returned.

[6] An 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 respondents without their participation. The personal respondent’s 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.

[7] The organizational respondent has provided a mailing address for the personal respondent. The Tribunal shall send a copy of this Interim Decision to the personal respondent at that address by courier and regular mail.

[8] If the personal respondent wishes to participate in this proceeding, a Response must be filed with the Tribunal no later than ten days from 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 personal respondent and may take any or all of the steps set out in Rule 5.5.

[9] The responding parties have indicated their consent to engage in mediation and the Registrar will schedule a mediation in the normal course. In the Response the personal respondent is asked to indicate whether he also wishes to participate in the mediation session.

[10] I am not seized of this matter.

Dated at Toronto, this 10^th day of July, 2012.

“Signed by”

David Muir

Vice-chair