C.K. v. C[...] Inc., 2012 HRTO 1403

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

C.K.

Applicant

-and-

C[...] Inc. and H.S.

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Ena Chadha Decision Date: July 18, 2012 Citation: 2012 HRTO 1403 Indexed as: C.K. v. C[...] Inc.

1By way of Interim Decision 2011 HRTO 785, this Application was deferred pending the conclusion of a criminal proceeding.

2On April 3, 2012, the applicant filed a request to reactivate the Application indicating that the criminal proceeding was concluded on February 13, 2012 with the personal respondent being convicted. The applicant provided a copy of a Probation Order dated February 13, 2012 issued by the Ontario Court of Justice which indicates that the personal respondent was convicted of sexual assault.

3On April 12, 2012, the personal respondent’s representative advised that the criminal process was still on-going. On April 19, 2012, the personal respondent’s representative provided the Tribunal with a copy of a letter from the personal respondent’s criminal lawyer. The letter states that the personal respondent is appealing his conviction, the next court date was May 9, 2012 and that the matter will likely be heard in the fall of 2012, although no hearing dates have been set. The personal respondent requested an extension of the deferral.

4The organizational respondent did not file any information or respond to the applicant’s request to reactivate.

5On May 24, 2012, the Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction directing all parties to write to the Tribunal, copied to each other, providing clarification as to the status of the criminal proceeding. In particular, the personal respondent was required to clarify what occurred on May 9, 2012.

6On June 4, 2012, the applicant filed submissions indicating that she does not have any further information as to the personal respondent’s appeal. The applicant further indicated that she has been unable to forward her correspondence to counsel for the organizational respondent because that individual’s contact address does not appear to be in service.

7I am unable to accede to the personal respondent’s request to extend the deferral of this Application. Based on the information provided by the parties, it appears that the original criminal proceedings are concluded and the status of the appeal has not been clarified. There is no clear indication as if and when any appeal will be scheduled. As such, it appears that there is no longer any basis to defer the Application. In the circumstances, the applicant’s request to reactivate the Application is granted.

8The applicant and the Tribunal have attempted to forward copies of materials to the organizational respondent’s counsel; however, it is unclear whether or not these materials have been received. As such, the Tribunal will forward a copy of this Interim Decision to the individual identified as the contact for the organizational respondent (Dr. F.H.), as well as counsel for the organizational respondent.

9I am not seized of this matter.