Williams v. Ontario (Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2015 HRTO 1718

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Kirk Williams Applicant

-and-

The Crown in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: David Muir Date: December 21, 2015 Citation: 2015 HRTO 1718 Indexed as: Williams v. Ontario (Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services)

1This is an Application filed on February 24, 2015 under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”).

2On July 8, 2015, the respondent filed a Request for Order seeking the removal of the applicant’s representative.

3On August 4, 2015, the respondent filed a Response to the Application. In its Response, the respondent sought the early dismissal of the Application.

4On September 1, 2015, the respondent filed a Request for Summary Hearing (Form 26).

5The applicant did not respond to the respondent’s two Requests and has not file a Reply to the respondent’s Response. The time for doing so has now passed for all three pleadings of the respondent.

6On September 17, 2015, the applicant requested an extension to respond. This request was granted and the applicant was directed to deliver and file responses to the respondent’s various requests by October 30, 2015. Nothing further has been heard from the applicant.

7The filing of an Application commences a legal proceeding which engages significant public and private resources. It is the Tribunal’s expectation that the parties to an Application will participate in the process. This includes responding to issues as they arise in the course of the proceeding. The applicant’s failure to respond to the respondent’s Response and Requests indicates that the applicant may have abandoned this Application.

8In a Case Assessment Direction issued on November 9, 2015, the applicant was directed to deliver and file a Response (Form 11) addressing the Requests of the respondent, together with an explanation for his failure to do so in a timely way, within 21 days of the date of the Case Assessment Direction. The applicant was advised that if he did not file a Response as directed the Application may be dismissed as abandoned.

9The applicant has not complied with these Directions nor has he communicated with the Tribunal in any way.

10Accordingly, I find that the applicant has abandoned his Application and it is dismissed.

11I am not seized.