Tessa Gouveia v. Peachtree Marketing Inc. and Tempo Framing Systems, 2015 HRTO 1346

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Tessa Gouveia

Applicant

-and-

Peachtree Marketing Inc. and Tempo Framing Systems

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Sheri D. Price

Date: October 8, 2015

Citation: 2015 HRTO 1346

Indexed as: Gouveia v. Peachtree Marketing Inc.

1This is an Application under the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), in which the applicant alleges that the respondent infringed her rights under the Code. A hearing of the Application is scheduled to take place on October 15 and 16, 2015, in Toronto.

2In April 2015, the Tribunal sent the parties a Notice of Hearing directing them to take certain steps in advance of the hearing. In particular, and among other things, the Notice of Hearing directed the parties to comply with Rules 16 and 17 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure (“the Rules”) by exchanging with one another and filing with the Tribunal the documents they intended to rely upon at the hearing and a summary of their witnesses’ anticipated evidence by no later than August 31, 2015.

3The applicant did not provide the Tribunal with the materials required under the Tribunal’s Rules by the August 2015 deadline.

4Accordingly, in a September 28, 2015 Case Assessment Direction (“CAD”), the Tribunal directed the applicant to provide the required materials to the respondent and the Tribunal by no later than October 5, 2015.

5In its September 28, 2015 Case Assessment Direction, the Tribunal warned the applicant that there were serious consequences for the case if she did not comply with the Tribunal’s directions. In particular, the Tribunal’s CAD advised the applicant that if she failed to comply with her pre-hearing disclosure requirements or to communicate with the Tribunal at all about her case by October 5, 2015, her Application might be dismissed as abandoned and the hearing cancelled.

6It is now past the applicant’s deadline for complying with the Tribunal’s directions and the applicant has not filed the required materials with the Tribunal, nor has she communicated with the Tribunal.

7In the circumstances, it appears that the applicant has abandoned the Application. Accordingly, the Application is dismissed as abandoned and the October 2015 hearing cancelled.

ORDER

8The Application is dismissed.