Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
B E T W E E N:
Kenan Galoglu
Applicant
-and-
A Wesley Paving Ltd.
Respondent
DECISION
Adjudicator: Laurie Letheren
Indexed as: Galoglu v. A Wesley Paving Ltd.
APPEARANCES
Kenan Galoglu, Applicant
Moira Wallace, Counsel
A Wesley Paving Ltd., Respondents
Chantel Goldsmith, Counsel
INTRODUCTION
1This Application alleges discrimination with respect to employment because of ethnic origin and disability contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended ( the “Code”).
2On April 7, 2015, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Hearing which clearly indicated the dates of hearing to be September 21 and 22, 2015 and the time for the hearing to be 9:30 AM.
3On August 18, 2015, the Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction which again indicated the hearing was scheduled to commence on September 21, 2015.
4Prior to the commencement of the hearing on September 21, 2015, counsel for Applicant contacted the HRTO to indicate that she would be 30 minutes late in arriving.
5I advised the Respondent, Respondent’s counsel, witness for the respondent and the language interpreter who were all in attendance in the hearing room before 9:30 AM that the Applicant’s counsel would be 30 minutes late and I would resume the hearing at 10:00 AM.
6When I returned to the hearing room at 10 AM, I was advised by Applicant’s counsel that the Applicant was not present at the Tribunal. The Applicant was on the phone with the interpreter who advised me and Applicant’s counsel that the Applicant was not aware that he had a hearing today. Through the interpreter, I asked where the Applicant was at that time. Through the interpreter, I was advised that he was within the city of Toronto near the Downsview subway station. I directed the Applicant to come right to the hearing and that I would wait until 11:00.
7I advised all those present in the hearing room that I would resume the hearing at 11:00. I asked Applicant’s counsel if her other witness was here and she said she would need to make a call.
8At 11:00 AM, I resumed the hearing and Applicant was still not present.
9At 11:05 I requested counsel to make submissions.
10Applicant’s counsel submitted that there is a language barrier between her and her client and that she expects that this may be the reason why he is not present at the hearing. She stated that her assistant had sent the notice of hearing. She believed that the Applicant was on his way and that we wait another 10 minutes.
11Respondent’s counsel requested that the matter be dismissed as abandoned as she, the respondent and the witness had all travelled, taken time off work and had been present and waiting since 9:15 AM.
12At 11:15 the Applicant has still not attended the hearing room.
13I am satisfied the Applicant’s counsel received timely and proper notice of the hearing. Applicant’s counsel advised that the Applicant had been sent the Notice of Hearing. I conduct a Google Map search of the time required to travel from Downsview subway station to the hearing centre. This indicated that whether travelling by car or Toronto Transit the time to travel would be 32 minutes at most.
14It would appear that the Applicant had sufficient notice of the hearing, and that once he had learned that he was late for his hearing, he had sufficient time to travel to arrive by 11:00 AM as directed.
15In the absence of the applicant at 11:15 AM, I dismiss his Application as abandoned.
ORDER
7The Application is dismissed.
Dated at Toronto, this 21st day of September, 2015.
“Signed By”
Laurie Letheren
Vice-chair