Christopher McDonald-Rogers v. Humber College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning, 2014 HRTO 879

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Christopher McDonald-Rogers Applicant

-and-

Humber College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning, York University, Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Training, College and Universities, Holsee Sahid, Erin Teich, K. Doran, Christopher Whitaker and John Davies Respondents

DECISION

Adjudicator: Mark Hart Date: June 13, 2014 Citation: 2014 HRTO 879 Indexed as: McDonald-Rogers v. Humber College

1This is an Application dated February 20, 2014 and completed March 19, 2014 alleging discrimination with respect to services because of disability and creed contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”).

2By Case Assessment Direction dated March 24, 2014, the Tribunal directed on its own initiative that a telephone hearing be held to determine whether the Application should be dismissed, in whole or in part, on the basis that there is no reasonable prospect that it will succeed. The respondents were not required to file Responses to the Application pending the result of the summary hearing.

3By Notice of Summary Hearing dated March 31, 2014, the parties were advised that the telephone hearing would be held on June 13, 2014 commencing at 1:30 p.m. and were provided with dial-in instructions. The Notice was sent to the applicant by mail at the address provided on the Application. The Notice was not returned to the Tribunal as undeliverable. In fact, as recently as February 26, 2014, the Tribunal had received mailed correspondence from the applicant showing as the return address the same address as appears on the Application and to which the Notice of Summary Hearing was sent.

4On June 3, 2014, e-mail correspondence was sent to the applicant confirming that a telephone hearing was scheduled to proceed on June 13, 2014 commencing at 1:30 p.m. This e-mail correspondence was sent to the applicant’s e-mail address as shown on the Application and from which the applicant had corresponded with the Tribunal as recently as March 20, 2014.

5The applicant was not in attendance for the telephone hearing when it was scheduled to commence at 1:30 p.m. All respondents were in attendance. I waited with the respondents on line until 2:00 p.m. in order to afford the applicant an opportunity to appear. He did not do so.

6An Application filed with this Tribunal commences a formal legal proceeding. It is the applicant’s obligation to participate in this legal proceeding, and particularly to appear for scheduled hearings, whether in person or by telephone. In the absence of an appearance by the applicant at a scheduled hearing, it is not the Tribunal’s obligation to proceed further with a legal proceeding that the applicant has commenced and, in the absence of exceptional circumstances to explain the failure to appear, the Application will be deemed to have been abandoned.

7I am satisfied that the applicant had notice of the summary hearing both by mail and by e-mail, and failed to appear for the hearing. Accordingly, the Application is dismissed as abandoned.