Sheval Rowe v. Bitumar (Hamilton) Inc., 2013 HRTO 236

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Sheval Rowe

Applicant

-and-

Bitumar (Hamilton) Inc.

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Mark Handelman Date: February 8, 2013 Citation: 2013 HRTO 236 Indexed as: Rowe v. Bitumar (Hamilton) Inc.

APPEARANCES

Sheval Rowe, Applicant No one appearing

Bitumar (Hamilton) Inc., Respondent William D. Anderson, Counsel

1This is an Application filed June 27, 2011 under section 34(1) of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”).

2On December 8, 2011, the Tribunal sent a notice to the parties confirming that the hearing in this matter was scheduled to proceed on June 14 and 15, 2012.

3The notice of hearing was sent to the applicant’s licensed representative, Ayoob Khan, at the address the representative provided. I am satisfied that the notice of hearing was received.

4On June 14, 2012, I appeared at the hearing at 9:30 a.m. and the respondent’s counsel was in attendance and ready to proceed with the hearing. The applicant did not appear. I stood the matter down until 10:00 a.m., and contacted the Tribunal’s offices to see if any correspondence or other communication had been received from the applicant, and was told that no such correspondence or communication had been received.

5A Tribunal application is a legal proceeding commenced by the applicant. It is the applicant’s responsibility to attend the hearing and provide evidence in support of the allegations raised in the Application. In the absence of such evidence, the Tribunal is unable to proceed with the Application and there is no onus or responsibility on the respondent to provide evidence in response to allegations where the applicant has failed to appear at the hearing and no evidence has been provided by the applicant in support of her allegations.

6In the absence of any correspondence or communication from the applicant to explain a failure to appear at the hearing and as a result of her failure to appear and provide any evidence in support of her allegations, the Application was dismissed.