Levey v. George’s Restaurant, 2015 HRTO 1157

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Derek Levey Applicant

-and-

George’s Restaurant, Donna Kiriakakis and Andy Tan Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Ken Bhattacharjee

Date: September 1, 2015

Citation: 2015 HRTO 1157

Indexed as: Levey v. George’s Restaurant

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Derek Levey, Applicant

Chantal Tie, Counsel

1On January 21, 2015, the applicant filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, which named George’s Restaurant, Donna Kiriakakis, and Andy Tan as respondents, and provided the same address for all three of them, which is the address of George’s Restaurant.

2On January 30, 2015, the Tribunal delivered a Notice of Application to the respondents at the address above, and directed them to file a Response by March 06, 2015.

3On March 6, 2015, George’s Restaurant and Ms. Kiriakakis filed a Response to the Application. They stated that Mr. Tan was no longer employed by them, and they have no knowledge of his current location.

4On July 15, 2015, applicant filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings (“RFOP”), which requested that the Tribunal order that (1) George’s Restaurant provide the last known address of Mr. Tan, and (2) Ms. Kiriakakis provide particulars in response to the allegations about her conduct in the Application.

5George’s Restaurant and Ms. Kiriakakis did not file a Response to the RFOP, and the time for doing so has now passed.

6I will deal first with the applicant’s request that the Tribunal order that George’s Restaurant provide the last known address of Mr. Tan. The applicant stated that he needs this information in order to conduct an investigation and provide the Tribunal with an address to serve the Application on Mr. Tan.

7The applicant’s request is granted. Within seven days of the date of this Interim Decision, George’s Restaurant shall deliver to the applicant the last known contact details (mailing address, email address, and telephone number) of Mr. Tan. Within 14 days of the date of this Interim Decision, the applicant shall file an updated address for Mr. Tan with the Tribunal. The Tribunal’s Registrar will then re-deliver the Notice of Application to Mr. Tan.

8I will deal next with the applicant’s request that the Tribunal order that Ms. Kiriakakis provide particulars in response to the allegations about her conduct in the Application. The applicant stated that the Response states, “I, Angelos Kiriakakis…”, and discloses his knowledge of incidents, what he witnessed, what he knew, and what actions he took, but that the Response does not disclose what Ms. Kiriakakis knew, and what actions she took in response to the applicant’s complaints.

9The applicant did not specify where the phrase, “I, Angelos Kiriakakis…”, is in the Response, and I am unable to find such a phrase. However, I agree that the narrative in section 9 of the Response is confusing because it appears to be written on behalf of both Angelos Kiriakakis, who operates George’s Restaurant, and Donna Kiriakakis, but uses the pronoun “I” throughout. To further confuse matters, section 11 of the Response uses the pronoun “we”.

10The applicant’s request is granted. Within 14 days of the date of this Interim Decision, George’s Restaurant and Ms. Kiriakakis shall file an amended Response, which clarifies who the “I” is in the narrative in section 9 of the Response, and which contains particulars in response to the allegations about Ms. Kiriakakis’ conduct in the Application.

11The Tribunal therefore makes the following orders:

1. Within seven days of the date of this Interim Decision, George’s Restaurant shall deliver to the applicant the last known contact details (mailing address, email address, and telephone number) of Andy Tan.

2. Within 14 days of the date of this Interim Decision, the applicant shall file an updated address for Mr. Tan with the Tribunal.

3. Within 14 days of the date of this Interim Decision, George’s Restaurant and Donna Kiriakakis shall file an amended Response, which clarifies who the “I” is in the narrative in section 9 of the Response, and which contains particulars in response to the allegations about Donna Kiriakakis’ conduct in the Application.

12The Tribunal’s Registrar will re-deliver the Notice of Application to Mr. Tan at the address provided by the applicant.

13I am not seized of this matter.