HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Miki Shinozaki
Applicant
-and-
Hotlomi Spa
Respondent
INTERIM decision
Adjudicator: Brian Eyolfson
Indexed as: Shinozaki v. Hotlomi Spa
1The applicant filed this Application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), on February 13, 2012.
2On March 15, 2012 the Tribunal issued a Notice of Application to the respondent in which it directed that a Response to the Application must be filed with the Tribunal not later than April 19, 2012.
3As of the date of this Interim Decision the respondent has not filed a Response, nor has the Tribunal’s correspondence to it been returned.
4An application to the Tribunal starts a legal proceeding. A finding that a violation of the Code has occurred may lead to various orders, including monetary compensation, other forms of restitution to the applicant, and orders to take action to promote compliance with the Code. Failure to file a response or participate in a Tribunal proceeding may lead to orders against individual and corporate respondents without their participation. The respondent’s attention is drawn to Rule 5.5 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure which reads as follows:
5.5 Where an Application is delivered to a Respondent who does not respond to the Application, the Tribunal may:
a) deem the Respondent to have accepted all of the allegations in the Application;
b) proceed to deal with the Application without further notice to the Respondent;
c) deem the Respondent to have waived all rights with respect to further notice or participation in the proceeding;
d) decide the matter based only on the material before the Tribunal.
5The applicant has provided a mailing address for the respondent and an email address. The Tribunal shall send a copy of this Interim Decision to the respondent by regular mail, courier, and email.
6If the respondent wishes to participate in this proceeding, it shall file a Response with the Tribunal within 10 days of the date of this Interim Decision, together with an explanation of why the Response was not filed in accordance with the Notice of Application. If a Response is not received, the Tribunal may proceed without further notice to the respondent and may take any or all of the steps set out in Rule 5.5.
7I am not seized of this matter.
Dated at Toronto, this 4th day of May, 2012.
”signed by”___________
Brian Eyolfson
Vice-chair