minicounsel

Stephanie Houghton v. Building Blocks Technologies Inc., 2013 HRTO 1906 — HRTO | minicounsel | minicounsel

November 18, 2013

Stephanie Houghton v. Building Blocks Technologies Inc., 2013 HRTO 1906

Case Summary

The applicant filed an application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, which was deferred pending the completion of an Employment Standards Act proceeding. The Tribunal subsequently wrote to the applicant twice to inquire about the status of the other proceeding, warning that failure to respond could result in the application being dismissed as abandoned. The applicant failed to respond to the Tribunal's correspondence. Consequently, the Tribunal deemed the application abandoned and dismissed it.

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Stephanie Houghton

Applicant

-and-

Building Blocks Technologies Inc.

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Sheri D. Price

Date: November 18, 2013

Citation: 2013 HRTO 1906

Indexed as: Houghton v. Building Blocks Technologies Inc.

[1] The applicant filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), on July 5, 2012.

[2] By Interim Decision [2012 HRTO 1867](https://www.minicounsel.ca/hrto/2012/1867), issued on October 2, 2012, the Tribunal deferred the Application, pending the completion of proceeding under the Employment Standards Act, 2000, S.O. 2000, c. 41, as amended (“the ESA”). The Interim Decision directed the applicant that if she wished to proceed with the Application following the conclusion of the ESA proceeding, she was required to contact the Tribunal’s Registrar no later than 60 days after the conclusion of the ESA proceeding

[3] On September 3, 2013, the Registrar wrote to the applicant seeking information on the status of the ESA proceeding. The September 3, 2013 letter contained the following direction to the applicant:

The Applicant is required to advise the HRTO whether the other process is still ongoing and, if possible when it is expected to be completed, within 30 days of the date of this letter. If the applicant fails to do so, the HRTO may dismiss the Application as abandoned. (emphasis in original)

[4] The applicant did not respond to the Tribunal’s September 3, 2013 letter.

[5] On October 15, 2013, the Registrar of the Tribunal wrote to the applicant again. In that letter, the Tribunal noted that the September 3, 2013 letter had been sent to the applicant by regular mail, whereas the applicant had indicated in her Application that her preferred method of contact was email. Accordingly, the Tribunal resent the September 3, 2013 and October 15, 2013 letters to the applicant by regular mail and by email and advised the applicant that the Tribunal would give her until October 25, 2013 to respond to the September 3, 2013 letter, failing which the Tribunal would review the Application for abandonment.

[6] As of the date of this Decision, the applicant has not responded to the Registrar’s September 3, 2013 and/or October 15, 2013 letters and the Tribunal’s correspondence to the applicant has not been returned as undeliverable.

[7] In the circumstances, the applicant is deemed to have abandoned the Application. The Application is dismissed accordingly.

Dated at Toronto, this 18^th^ day of November, 2013.

“Signed by”

Sheri D. Price

Vice-chair