Meenu Rathore v. Canadian Tire o/a Jakubow Enterprises, 2012 HRTO 495

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Meenu Rathore

Applicant

-and-

Canadian Tire o/a Jakubow Enterprises

Respondents

DECISION

Adjudicator: Naomi Overend

Date: March 8, 2012

Citation: 2012 HRTO 495

Indexed as: Rathore v. Canadian Tire o/a Jakubow Enterprises

AppearanceS BY

) Meenu Rathore, Applicant ) No One Appearing

Canadian Tire o/a Jakubow Enterprises, ) Nancy Holmes

Respondent )

1This is an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, (‘the Code”).

2Pursuant to a Case Assessment Direction dated May 24, 2011, the Tribunal directed, on its own initiative, that a summary hearing be convened pursuant to Rule 19A of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure to determine whether the Application should be dismissed, in whole or in part, on the basis that there was no reasonable prospect that the Application or part of the Application will succeed. In its Case Assessment Direction, the Tribunal directed that the summary hearing would proceed by way of teleconference and advised the parties that a Notice of Summary Hearing would be sent to them by the Registrar’s office.

3A Notice of Summary Hearing was sent to the parties on September 26, 2011, advising that the summary hearing would take place on November 25, 2011, but there were techinical difficulties and when they were resolved, only the respondent was on the conference line. A new Notice of Summary Hearing was sent on December 20, 2011, advising that the summary hearing was rescheduled for February 2, 2012, but it was necessary to reschedule that date as well.

4The final Notice of Summary Hearing was sent to the parties via email on February 24, 2012 advising them that a hearing was scheduled for March 6, 2012 to commence promptly at 9:30 a.m. The Notice of Summary Hearing also advised the parties how to connect to the teleconference. The Notice of Summary Hearing was emailed to the applicant at the address provided by her to the Tribunal, and by which she had communicated to the Tribunal as recently as February 20, 2012.

5The Summary Hearing was convened by teleconference on March 6, 2012, at the scheduled time. The respondent’s representative was present at the summary hearing. The applicant did not attend the hearing and failed to advise anyone that she would not be attending the hearing.

6I indicated to the respondents that we would wait 15 minues in order to give the applicant an opportunity to attend the call. After the allotted time, the applicant was still not present. I asked the respondent’s representative to remain available to take a call for an additional 15 minutes during which time I ensured that the applicant had not notified the Tribunal she was experiencing difficulty dialling in on the teleconference line.

7I was satisfied at the hearing that the applicant had received timely and proper notice of the summary hearing. In the absence of the applicant or any explanation for her failure to attend the hearing, I am dismissing the Application as abandoned.

ORDER

8The Application is dismissed.