Shamim Parves v. Thiaf Chowdhury, 2012 HRTO 1646

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

Between:

Shamim Parves Applicant

-and-

Thiaf Chowdhury Respondent

Decision

Adjudicator: Brian Eyolfson Date: August 28, 2012 Citation: 2012 HRTO 1646 Indexed as: Parves v. Chowdhury

1The applicant filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"), on January 23, 2009.

2In Interim Decision 2010 HRTO, 1060 issued May 12, 2010, the Tribunal deferred this Application pending the conclusion of proceedings under the Employment Standards Act, 2000, S.O. 2000, c. 41, as amended.

3On May 11, 2012, the Tribunal wrote to the applicant's representative at the address provided in the Application for both the applicant and his representative. The applicant was asked to inform the Registrar in writing within 30 days of the date of the letter whether the proceedings under the Employment Standards Act, 2000 remained ongoing and, if possible, to indicate when they were expected to be completed. The letter went on to warn the applicant that failure to provide the requested information might result in the Tribunal dismissing the Application as abandoned.

4The applicant has not responded to the Tribunal's May 11, 2012 letter, and the Tribunal's correspondence has not been returned as undeliverable.

5The Tribunal also wrote to the applicant and his representative by e-mail on July 30, 2012, requesting an update on the status of the Employment Standards Act, 2000 proceeding and requesting a response on or before August 7, 2012. The e-mail was sent to an e-mail address provided in the Application for both the applicant and his representative. The Tribunal was notified that delivery of the July 30, 2012 e-mail failed to reach the recipient.

6On August 3, 2012, the Tribunal sent additional correspondence to the applicant and his representative by regular mail to the address provided in the Application, again seeking an update on the Employment Standards Act, 2000 proceeding and requesting a response on or before August 17, 2012. The letter indicated that if a response to the letter was not received by August 17, 2012, the Application would be considered abandoned.

7The applicant has not responded to the Tribunal's August 3, 2012 letter, and the Tribunal's letter to the applicant and his representative has not been returned as undeliverable.

8In the circumstances, the applicant is deemed to have abandoned the Application and the Application is dismissed.