Barrington Brooks v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services, 2015 HRTO 1068

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Barrington Brooks

Applicant

-and-

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Naomi Overend

Date: August 11, 2015

Citation: 2015 HRTO 1068

Indexed as: Brooks v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services)

1The applicant filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), on January 2, 2014. A hearing in this matter was scheduled for October 30 and 31, 2014, but was adjourned.

2By letter to the applicant’s counsel, dated March 17, 2015, and copied to the applicant, the Tribunal directed the applicant, or his counsel, to advise the Tribunal and the respondent whether he intended to proceed with the Application, by April 7, 2015. The Tribunal indicated that if the applicant did not respond to the Tribunal’s letter by April 7, 2015, the Tribunal may deem the Application to be abandoned, and dismiss the file.

3By email correspondence dated April 7, 2015, counsel for the applicant advised the Tribunal and the respondent that he was no longer representing the applicant. By further letter dated April 23, 2015 to the applicant and his former counsel, the Tribunal indicated that it had not received a response to its March 17, 2015 letter asking the applicant, or his counsel, to advise the Tribunal and the respondent whether the applicant intended to proceed with the Application.

4In its April 23, 2015 letter, the Tribunal also indicated that the applicant must advise the Tribunal and the respondent, in writing, whether he intended to proceed with the Application, by May 7, 2015. The Tribunal indicated that if the applicant did not respond to the letter by May 7, 2015, the Tribunal may deem the Application to be abandoned and dismiss the file. By email correspondence dated April 27, 2015, the applicant’s former counsel advised the Tribunal and the respondent that the applicant was making efforts to secure legal representation and would be contacting the Tribunal in short order. To date, the Tribunal has not heard from the applicant.

5The Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction (“CAD”) on June 18, 2015 directing the applicant to advise the Tribunal and the respondent whether he intends to proceed with the Application, within 14 days of the CAD.

6The applicant was warned that if he did not respond to the CAD as directed, the Application would be dismissed as abandoned. The applicant has not responded to the CAD and the time for doing so has now passed.

7In the circumstances, the applicant is deemed to have abandoned the Application.

8The Application is dismissed.