Sears v. CAA North & East Ontario, 2014 HRTO 959

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Cru Sears

Applicant

-and-

CAA North & East Ontario and CRR Cornwall Roadside Recovery Inc. o/a Glen’s Towing

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Yola Grant

Date: June 30, 2014

Citation: 2014 HRTO 959

Indexed as: Sears v. CAA North & East Ontario

Introduction

1On May 27, 2013, the Applicant filed an Application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”) .

BACKGROUND

2On October 3, 2013, the Tribunal issued an Interim Decision, 2013 HRTO 1666 (“the ID”) to the respondent CRR Cornwall Roadside Recovery Inc. (“CRR”) in which it directed that a Response must be filed with the Tribunal no later than 14 days from the date of that ID. The ID was sent by regular mail and courier and was not returned to the Tribunal as being undeliverable. The ID contained the following warning:

If a Response is not received, the Tribunal may proceed without further notice to the respondent, and may take any or all of the steps set out in Rule 5.5.

3The respondent CRR did not file a Response or otherwise communicate with the Tribunal.

4Note that Rule 5.5 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure provides as follows:

5.5 Where an Application is delivered to a Respondent who does not respond to the Application, the Tribunal may:

a) deem the Respondent to have accepted all of the allegations in the Application;

b) proceed to deal with the Application without further notice to the Respondent;

c) deem the Respondent to have waived all rights with respect to further notice or participation in the proceeding;

d) decide the matter based only on the material before the Tribunal.

DECISION

5In Kearns v. 1327827 Ontario, 2009 HRTO 457 at paras. 11 to 14, the Tribunal set out its approach in circumstances where a respondent fails to file a Response after having been cautioned by the Tribunal about the consequences of not doing so. As the Tribunal noted, after having been provided clear notice of what is required, a respondent who refuses or chooses not to file a Response should not be able to frustrate the objects of the Code, and the applicant’s rights to assert a claim and seek a timely determination of that claim.

6Where no Response is filed, the Tribunal will proceed to determine the Application in the absence of the respondent. I am satisfied that the respondent has received the Notice of Application and the further direction requiring the filing of a Response. The respondent has refused or has chosen not to participate in these proceedings.

ORDER

7For the reasons set out above, I make the following order:

a. The respondent CRR is deemed to have accepted all of the allegations set out in the Application; and

b. The respondent CRR is deemed to have waived all rights to notice or participation in these proceedings.

c. The respondent CRR is not entitled to further notice with respect to the Application.

NEXT STEPS

8The Tribunal will schedule a hearing for one (1) day to hear and decide the matter.

9I am not seized of this matter.