Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
B E T W E E N:
Sara Anne Marielle Lacarte Applicant
-and-
Birnie Law Firm Respondent
DECISION
Adjudicator: Maureen Doyle Date: February 22, 2013 Citation: 2013 HRTO 299 Indexed as: Lacarte v. Birnie Law Firm
1This is an Application filed under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"), alleging discrimination with respect to employment because of sex.
2On January 24, 2013, the Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction ("CAD") in which it alerted the parties to the fact that they had failed to comply with their obligations under Rules 16 and 17 to deliver to every other party and to file with the Tribunal a witness list, witness statements and copies of documents upon which they intend to rely, no later than 45 days prior to the hearing. It directed the applicant to file the materials immediately with the Tribunal and indicated that if she had not done so within seven days of the CAD, the Application may be dismissed as abandoned. It also directed the respondent to file the materials required under Rules 16 and 17 within seven days of receipt of the applicant's documents.
3The applicant did not file the materials required under Rules 16 and 17, but sent an email to the Tribunal indicating that she has no witnesses or documents to produce, and inquiring "Will this still be permissible?"
4On February 8, 2013, the Tribunal issued a further CAD, noting the content of the applicant's email and directing her to confirm to the other party and to the Tribunal as to whether she would be testifying at the hearing. She was also directed to provide a will-say statement of her proposed testimony, or to confirm that her testimony would be confined to the statements made in her Application. She was directed to provide this information to the respondent and to file it with the Tribunal within seven days of the CAD and advised that if she failed to do so, the Application may be dismissed as abandoned.
5The February 8, 2013 CAD was sent to the applicant and it has not been returned to the Tribunal as undeliverable.
6I am satisfied that the Applicant had notice of the requirement to comply with the Tribunal's order regarding production of documentation regarding testimony or risk dismissal of her Application on the basis that it had been abandoned.
7The applicant has not complied with the Tribunal's order requiring production of documentation regarding testimony, nor has she communicated with the Tribunal to explain her inability to do so or to request an extension of the time limit stated in the CAD.
8In the circumstances and in view of the applicant's non-compliance with the Tribunal's order, the Application is hereby dismissed as abandoned. The hearing date in this matter is cancelled.
Dated at Toronto, this 22^nd^ day of February, 2013.
"Signed by"
_________________________________
Maureen Doyle Vice-chair