Tom Raba v. Mohammed Jacquesson, Landlord and Tenant Board, and Gail Culver, 2015 HRTO 1641

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Tom Raba Applicant

-and-

Mohammed Jacquesson, Landlord and Tenant Board, and Gail Culver Respondents

DECISION

Adjudicator: Ken Bhattacharjee Date: December 3, 2015 Citation: 2015 HRTO 1641 Indexed as: Raba v. Jacquesson

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Tom Raba, Applicant Self-represented

1The purpose of this Decision is to decide whether these three Applications should be dismissed on a preliminary basis.

2On September 14, 2015, the applicant filed three Applications under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), which alleged that the respondents discriminated against him and subjected him to reprisals. All three Applications were incomplete and devoid of particulars.

3On September 24, 2015, the Tribunal issued a Decision with respect to a different Application (File No. 2014-18041-I), Raba v. Vaccarelli, 2015 HRTO 1279, which made the following orders at para. 99:

2. The applicant is declared a vexatious litigant. I order that Tomasz Raba or Tom Raba (as he files applications under both names) may not file further applications at this Tribunal pertaining to his tenancy with these respondents, these respondents, his 2012 [Landlord and Tenant] proceeding, or his other legal proceedings pertaining to these respondents without leave of the Tribunal; and,

3. If the applicant seeks leave of the Tribunal to file any such future applications, he must include with his complete application submissions that outline why the application is intended as a legitimate assertion of his Code rights, is not intended to vex the respondents and will not result in an abuse of process. The Tribunal will consider any future applications which fail to include these submissions as incomplete and will treat them as such.

4On October 7, 2015, the Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction, which directed the applicant to file submissions that outline why these three Applications are a legitimate assertion of his Code rights, and are not intended to vex the respondents and will not result in an abuse of process.

5On October 9 and November 9, 2015, the applicant filed submissions, which appear to indicate that these three Applications are related to his 2012 Landlord and Tenant Board proceeding, and that he was dissatisfied with the conduct of the respondents, but he did not provide any particulars explaining how the respondents allegedly violated his rights under the Code. He mainly disputed the declaration that he is a vexatious litigant.

6In view of the fact that these three Applications were filed before the Tribunal declared the applicant a vexatious litigant, the issue to be decided is not whether the applicant should be granted leave to file these Applications, but rather, whether these Applications should be dismissed on a preliminary basis.

7In my view, these three Applications should be dismissed on a preliminary basis because it is plain and obvious that there are no Code-related allegations against the respondents, and the Applications are therefore outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.

8In these circumstances, it is not necessary to also address whether these Applications are a legitimate assertion of the applicant’s Code rights, and are intended to vex the respondents and will result in an abuse of process. However, it seems obvious, based on my review of the Applications, the applicant’s submissions, and the Tribunal’s Decision in Raba v. Vaccarelli, 2015 HRTO 1279, that these Applications are vexatious and an abuse of process.

9The Applications are dismissed.