Viel v. LSM Management Inc., 2012 HRTO 179

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Irene Viel

Applicant

-and-

LSM Management Inc., Conseil d’Administration Lafontaine and LSM Services

Respondents

DECISION

Adjudicator: Kevin G. Cleghorn Date: January 24, 2012 Citation: 2012 HRTO 179 Indexed as: Viel v. LSM Management Inc.

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 May 13, 2011.

2On November 1, 2011, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Summary Hearing to the parties confirming that the summary hearing of the Application would take place on January 16, 2012, commencing at 9:30 a.m. by teleconference. The Notice was delivered to the applicant at the last address provided by the applicant to the Tribunal and was not returned as undeliverable.

3I am satisfied that the applicant had notice of the summary hearing.

4The applicant was not in attendance by telephone at the commencement of the scheduled hearing. In accordance with its usual practice, the Tribunal waited until 10:00 a.m. before proceeding.

5At 10:00 a.m., the applicant was not in attendance by telephone nor had the applicant communicated with the Tribunal to explain the failure to attend or participate.

6A Tribunal application is a legal proceeding commenced by the applicant. It is the applicant’s responsibility to participate in the summary hearing and make argument about why the Application should not be dismissed as having no reasonable prospect of success. She was asked to point to the evidence which clarifies the link between the respondent’s actions and the grounds cited as a Code violation, as directed by the Tribunal in the Case Assessment Direction dated August 26, 2011. In the absence of such clarification, the Tribunal is unable to proceed with the Application and there is no onus or responsibility on the respondent to respond to allegations where the applicant has failed to participate in the summary hearing and no clarification has been provided by the applicant regarding her allegations.

7In the circumstances, the Application is dismissed on the basis that the applicant is deemed to have abandoned the Application.