Gibson v. Deplaedt, 2013 HRTO 1339

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Shirley Gibson

Applicant

-and-

William Deplaedt

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Ena Chadha

Date: August 1, 2013

Citation: 2013 HRTO 1339

Indexed as: Gibson v. Deplaedt

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Shirley Gibson, Applicant ) Self-represented

William Deplaedt, Respondent ) Self-represented

1The applicant filed this Application for Contravention of Settlement (Form 18), on June 25, 2013, pursuant to s. 45.9(3) of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (“Code”), alleging that the respondent breached a settlement entered into by the parties in relation to a previous application filed with the Tribunal.

2Rule 24.2 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure required the applicant to file a copy of the written settlement alleged to have been contravened, together with her Form 18 (Application for Contravention of Settlement); however, the applicant failed to do so.

3The respondent filed a Form 19 Response to the Contravention of Settlement Application on July 3, 2013. The Response indicates that the parties never entered into a settlement and that the previous application was dismissed by way of Decision 2013 HRTO 28. The respondent provided a copy of that Decision.

4Having reviewed the Tribunal’s Decision involving these parties, it appears that the respondent is correct in noting that the applicant’s previous application was dismissed pursuant to section 45.1 of the Code as appropriately dealt with by another legal proceeding. The applicant’s Contravention of Settlement Application narrative failed to identify what terms or aspects of settlement the applicant alleged that the respondent contravened. The applicant also failed to provide a copy of any minutes of settlement in compliance with Rule 24.2.

5I find that this Contravention of Settlement Application must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The applicant did not provide a copy of any minutes of settlement and the Application does not detail the alleged breach of settlement or a term of the settlement that the applicant seeks to enforce. Based on the respondent’s submissions it appears, in fact, that no settlement ever existed.

6In these circumstances, the Tribunal orders that the Application is dismissed.