HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Muhammad Arfan Chughtai
Applicant
-and-
Paragon Protection Ltd.
Respondent
DECISION
Adjudicator: Jay Sengupta
Indexed as: Chughtai v. Paragon Protection Ltd.
Introduction
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”).
2A hearing into this matter is scheduled to take place on June 7, 2013. A Case Assessment Direction (CAD) was issued on May 10, 2013, alerting the applicant to the fact that he had failed to comply with the obligations under Rules 16 and 17 to deliver to every other party and file with the Tribunal a witness list, witness statements, and copies of documents the party intends to rely upon no later than 45 days prior to the hearing.
3Those documents and witness statements were due on April 23, 2013.
4The CAD included the following statement from the Tribunal’s decision in C.D. v. Wal-Mart Canada, 2010 HRTO 426 at para 7:
A witness statement should be filed for each witness, including an applicant or individual respondent. Where the Application or Response itself makes clear the proposed testimony, the witness statement may simply confirm that the summary of facts in the Application or Response is complete and reflects the evidence that will be given by the applicant or individual respondent.
5The applicant was directed to immediately comply with the requirements under Rules 16 and 17, and the CAD indicated that if he had not done so within seven days, the Application may be dismissed as abandoned.
6The CAD, sent to the applicant by email and regular mail, has not been returned as undeliverable and the applicant has not contacted the Tribunal or filed any documents or witness statements.
7Accordingly, the Application is dismissed as abandoned.
Dated at Toronto, this 21st day of May, 2013.
“signed by”
Jay Sengupta
Vice-chair