Davis v. Honda of Canada, Mfg., 2012 HRTO 555

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Kevin Davis

Applicant

-and-

Honda of Canada, Mfg.,

Ellen Purchase, Mike Coe and Michelle Kerr

Respondents

DECISION

Adjudicator: Mark Hart

Date: March 19, 2012

Citation: 2012 HRTO 555

Indexed as: Davis v. Honda of Canada, Mfg.

1This is an Application made under s. 53(3) of the Ontario Human Rights Code, dated July 29, 2008. The underlying complaint was filed with the Ontario Human Rights Commission (the “Commission”) on January 3, 2008.

2The applicant alleges discrimination in employment because of disability, arising out of his employment with the respondent company.

3On December 4, 2008, a consent order was issued by this Tribunal deferring this Application pending the disposition of concurrent and related proceedings before the Workplace Safety and Insurance Tribunal (“WSIAT”) and in the civil court, without prejudice to the respondent’s ability to pursue a request for dismissal of the Application either as barred by s. 34(11) of the Code due to the civil proceeding or pursuant to s. 45.1 of the Code as having already been appropriately dealt with in another proceeding.

4On October 7, 2010, the Tribunal wrote to the parties to request a status update on the WSIAT and civil proceedings. By letter dated October 26, 2010, applicant’s counsel wrote to the Tribunal and the parties to advise that the civil proceeding was ongoing.

5On June 8, 2011, the Tribunal wrote again to the parties to request a further update on the status of the civil proceeding. Once again, applicant’s counsel replied by letter dated June 27, 2011 to advise that the civil proceeding was ongoing but was estimated to conclude by September 2011.

6On November 8, 2011, the Tribunal wrote yet again to the parties to request information on the status of the civil proceeding, particularly given that applicant’s counsel had estimated that it would have been concluded by September 2011. A response was requested by no later than November 22, 2011.

7No response to this letter was received by the Tribunal. As a result, on November 30, 2011, the Tribunal sent a further letter to the parties, this time directing the applicant to provide an update in writing with respect to the status of the civil proceeding and to advise whether he intended to proceed further with his Application before this Tribunal. The applicant was directed to respond within 20 calendar days of the date of the November 30, 2011 letter, failing which his Application may be dismissed as abandoned.

8It is now some three and a half months since the Tribunal’s last correspondence, and no response has been forthcoming from the applicant or his counsel.

9For these reasons, this Application is dismissed as abandoned.