Islam v. Trevi Investments, 2012 HRTO 1835

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Rafiqul Islam Applicant

-and-

Trevi Investments Inc. Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Mary Truemner Date: September 25, 2012 Citation: 2012 HRTO 1835 Indexed as: Islam v. Trevi Investments

APPEARANCES

Rafiqul Islam, Applicant Bruce Best, Counsel

Trevi Investments Inc., Respondent Dina Krznaric, Representative

Introduction

1This is an Application filed under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), alleging discrimination with respect to accommodation because of place of origin and citizenship.

REQUEST TO ADJOURN

2The hearing of this matter was scheduled for September 24, 2012. On that morning, the applicant, his counsel and his witnesses appeared. The applicant’s counsel explained that the respondent’s counsel communicated to him that he had suddenly become ill, and was unable to attend the hearing. The owner of the respondent, who was present at the hearing, agreed that the respondent was seeking an adjournment. The applicant consented. I granted the request because the respondent’s counsel had become suddenly ill and was therefore unable to attend the day of the hearing, because the respondent confirmed its wish to be represented by counsel, and because the applicant consented to an adjournment.

LEGAL NAME OF RESPONDENT

3The applicant requested information with respect to the legal name of the respondent given that a corporate search revealed that Trevi Investments Inc. does not exist. The owner of the corporation agreed to confirm what the legal name is with her counsel. The respondent must confirm the legal name of the property management company operating the building with the unit which the applicant wanted to rent, as well as the legal name of the owner of the building. The respondent’s confirmation must be sent in writing to the Tribunal and to the applicant within 14 days of this Interim Decision.

FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH RULES 16 AND 17

4I noted at the hearing that the respondent had not complied with the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure (Rules 16 and 17). I also noted that the applicant filed Requests for compliance, but the respondent provided no response, nor did it comply with my Case Assessment Direction of September 17, 2012 (“the CAD”), with the result that the respondent, on the day the hearing was to commence, had not filed its documents upon which it intended to rely, its witness list or the summaries of what each witness would say. I told the parties that I would issue directions, now contained in this Interim Decision.

5The Notice of Confirmation of Hearing dated June 18, 2012 advised the parties that they must exchange all arguably relevant documents, and, additionally, file at the Tribunal all documents referred to in the above paragraph. The respondent did not do so. The respondent was then warned in the CAD that there can be serious consequences for the case if this step is not taken. The respondent still did not provide all arguably relevant documents to the applicant, nor did it file with the Tribunal, copying the applicant, all documents referred to in the above paragraph.

DIRECTIONS

6The respondent must provide the applicant with all arguably relevant documents within 7 days of the date of this Interim Decision, and file with the Tribunal, copying the applicant, its documents upon which it intends to rely, its witness list and the summaries of what each witness will say, within 14 days of the date of this Interim Decision. In its summaries of what each witness will say, there must be particulars describing exactly its “credit criteria” (the phrase referenced by the respondent in its Response).

7Also within 14 days of the date of this Interim Decision, the respondent must file an explanation of why it has not complied with Rules 16 and 17, and with the Tribunal’s direction of September 17, 2012. The Tribunal will review this explanation prior to making any decision about whether the respondent may be permitted to rely at the next hearing dates upon documents or witnesses that were not previously shared and described.

8Finally, as stated above, the respondent must confirm the legal name of the property management company operating the building with the unit which the applicant wanted to rent, as well as the legal name of the owner of the building. The respondent’s confirmation must be sent in writing to the Tribunal and to the applicant within 14 days of this Interim Decision.

9The next hearing date will be scheduled by the Tribunal, hopefully in November. It will be a half day by teleconference to deal with the legal name of the respondent, and to determine any consequences for the respondent for not complying with Rules 16 and 17, and the CAD. No witnesses will need to attend. The Tribunal will also proceed to schedule a subsequent one day hearing where personal attendance of the parties, their counsel and their witnesses will be required.