Baccala v. Extendicare (Canada) Inc., 2012 HRTO 369

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Caterina Baccala

Applicant

-and-

Extendicare (Canada) Inc. and Medex Extendicare

Respondents

Decision

Adjudicator: David Muir

Date: February 22, 2012

Citation: 2012 HRTO 369

Indexed as: Baccala v. Extendicare (Canada) Inc.

1The applicant filed an Application under s. 53(5) of Part VI of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), on June 30, 2009. This Application was deferred by decision of the Tribunal 2010 HRTO 603 pending the conclusion of a proceeding before the Workplace Safety Insurance Appeals Tribunal (the “WSIAT”). The Tribunal’s decision 2010 HRTO 603 was issued March 19, 2010.

2By letter dated December 1, 2010 and February 2, 2011, respectively, the Tribunal wrote to the parties with Directions requesting an update on the status of the WSIAT proceeding.

3The respondents have never responded to these Directions. The applicant’s representative wrote to the Tribunal on February 10, 2011, indicating that she had not abandoned the Application under the Code.

4In a Case Assessment Direction (“CAD”) dated June 17, 2011, the applicant was directed to comply with the Tribunal’s prior Directions to advise the Tribunal of the status of the WSIAT proceeding; i.e., if the hearing has begun or if a date has been set for a proceeding etc.

5On July 5, 2011, the applicant’s representative wrote to the Tribunal advising that the proceeding before the WSIAT was inactive, but that the applicant was taking steps to have the file “activated as soon as possible and getting a final conclusion to the matter.”

6In a CAD dated October 5, 2011, the applicant was directed again to advise the Tribunal and the respondents of the status of the WSIAT proceeding within 20 days of the date of this CAD failing which the Application might be dismissed as abandoned.

7The applicant’s representative wrote to the Tribunal on October 12, 2011, and advised that the WSIAT file was inactive for four months beginning July 25, 2011, and that the Office of the Worker Advisor was taking over carriage of that matter. The status of the WSIAT process remained unknown at this time.

8In a CAD dated December 16, 2011, the applicant was directed to advise the Tribunal and the respondents of the status of the WSIAT proceeding within 20 days of the date of the CAD failing which the Application may be dismissed as abandoned.

9As of this writing, the applicant did not respond in any way to the December 16,2011 CAD. In a further CAD dated January 24, 2012 the applicant was directed to confirm within seven days of the date of this CAD the status of the WSIAT proceeding and her intentions with respect to this Application, failing which the Application would be dismissed as abandoned. As of this writing the applicant has not responded in any way to these further Directions of the Tribunal.

10This Application has been outstanding since June 2009. Since March 2010, the Application has been deferred pending a WSIAT proceeding the status of which continues to remain unknown, despite previous requests from the Tribunal that the applicant advise of the status of the other proceeding. As previously indicated this Application cannot remain in limbo indefinitely. In light of the applicant’s continuing failure to respond in any way to the last two CADs I find that the applicant has abandoned this Application and accordingly it must be dismissed.