James Chownyk v. Commissionaires-Hamilton, 2013 HRTO 1301

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

James Chownyk

Applicant

-and-

Commissionaires-Hamilton

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Naomi Overend Date: July 25, 2013 Citation: 2013 HRTO 1301 Indexed as: Chownyk v. Commissionaires-Hamilton

1The applicant filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), on April 8, 2013.

2On April 26, 2013 the Tribunal issued a Notice of Incomplete Application and Notice of Intent to Dismiss (“NOID”) to the Applicant. It directed the applicant to provide missing information from his Application and to provide submissions on whether the Application was within the Tribunal’s power to decide on the basis that it appeared “the narrative setting out the incidents of alleged discrimination fails to identify any specific acts of discrimination within the meaning of the Code.” The applicant was directed to respond to the issues raised by no later than May 16, 2013.

3Although the applicant responded with some of the missing information, the new information provided still appeared not to identify any specific acts of discrimination within the meaning of the Code. By Case Assessment Direction (“CAD”) dated May 31, 2013, the applicant was directed to immediately provide submissions addressing the issue that it appeared the applicant’s “narrative setting out the incidents of alleged discrimination [still] fails to identify any specific acts of discrimination within the meaning of the Code.” The applicant was advised that if he did not provide submissions within 14 days of the CAD the Tribunal might dismiss his Application as abandoned.

4The applicant has not responded to the CAD and the time for doing so has now passed.

5In the circumstances, the applicant is deemed to have abandoned the Application.

6The Application is dismissed.