HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Stephen Sinclair
Applicant
-and-
Presto Auto Glass Inc.
Respondent
DECISION
Adjudicator: Ena Chadha
Indexed as: Sinclair v. Presto Auto Glass Inc.
1The applicant filed this Application on November 15, 2012 alleging discrimination under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, (“Code”) as amended, with respect to employment on the basis of disability.
2On December 4, 2012, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (“Notice”) to the applicant. The Notice indicated that the Tribunal may not have jurisdiction over the Application because it was filed more than one year after the last incident of discrimination described in the Application. The Notice directed the applicant to respond to the issues of jurisdiction and delay raised in the Notice by no later than January 10, 2013. The Notice advised the applicant that failure to respond to the Notice may be considered an abandonment of the Application and it might be dismissed for that reason.
3The applicant has failed to file submissions in response to the Notice. The time for doing so has now elapsed.
4In the circumstances, the applicant is deemed to have abandoned the Application.
5Accordingly, the Application is dismissed.
Dated at Toronto, this 5th day of February, 2013.
“Signed by”
Ena Chadha
Vice-chair