James Kalloosingh v. Extreme Fitness Inc., 2014 HRTO 8

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

James Kalloosingh

Applicant

-and-

Extreme Fitness Inc., Sam Elahamar,

Nathan Mason and David Don

Respondents

DECISION

Adjudicator: David Muir

Date: January 6, 2014

Citation: 2014 HRTO 8

Indexed as: Kalloosingh v. Extreme Fitness Inc.

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.

2The corporate respondent, Extreme Fitness Inc. (“Extreme Fitness”), and the individual respondents Sam Elahamar, Nathan Mason and David Don, filed a collective Response on April 2, 2013.

3On July 15, 2013, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Mediation indicating that a mediation was scheduled in this matter for September 23, 2013.

4On September 17, 2013, counsel for Extreme Fitness wrote to the Tribunal indicating that counsel will no longer be representing the respondents. Counsel advised that Extreme Fitness made an application pursuant to the Companies’ Creditors’ Arrangement Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-36, on February 7, 2013 and on March 27, 2013, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice granted an order approving of an asset purchase agreement involving Extreme Fitness’s assets. Counsel stated that Extreme Fitness no longer carries on business and that “no realization is anticipated for any of Extreme’s unsecured creditors”.

5Counsel provided the contact information for Sam Elahamar and Nathan Mason and indicated that counsel did not have the contact information for David Don. Counsel also noted that it appeared that David Don was not formally named as a respondent. Counsel confirmed that the individual respondents were advised that counsel no longer represented them.

6The Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction on December 9, 2013 making a number of Directions to the parties. In particular the Tribunal directed that the applicant indicate within 14 days of the Direction whether he wished to proceed with the Application against any of the identified respondents failing which the Application may be dismissed as abandoned.

7The applicant has not communicated with the Tribunal in any manner since the Direction above and has not indicated that he wishes to proceed further with the Application. The Application is accordingly dismissed as abandoned.