HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Peter Georgakopoulos
Applicant
-and-
Melisa Arias Montes
Respondent
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Jo-Anne Pickel
Indexed as: Georgakopoulos v. Montes
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Peter Georgakopoulos, Applicant
Self-represented
1In his Application, the applicant alleged that the following individuals discriminated against him because of disability contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. c. H. 19, as amended (the “Code”): Kathleen Wynne, Glenn Murray, and Melisa Arias Montes.
Application as Against Kathleen Wynne and Glenn Murray
2Following receipt of the Application, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss Against Certain Respondents and Incomplete Application (“Notice”). In the Notice, the Tribunal advised the applicant that the Application as against Kathleen Wynne and Glenn Murray appeared to fall outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. As stated in the Notice, the narrative setting out incidents of alleged discrimination in the Application failed to identify specific acts of discrimination, within the meaning of the Code, allegedly committed by these individuals. The Tribunal directed the applicant to provide written submissions explaining how these individuals are alleged to have breached the Code.
3Having reviewed the applicant’s submissions, I find that the Application as against Kathleen Wynne and Glenn Murray must be dismissed as outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. In his submissions, the applicant made clear that his Application is primarily against Ms. Arias Montes who appears to be employed by the Ministry of Transportation. He stated that he named Ms. Wynne and Mr. Murray because they did not respond to letters he sent to them complaining about Ms. Aria Montes’ actions. As the Tribunal has stated in many cases, the Tribunal does not have a general power to inquire into all claims of unfairness. I find it plain and obvious that the Application does not identify specific acts of alleged discrimination, within the meaning of the Code, by Ms. Wynne and Mr. Murray. The Application as against these individuals is therefore dismissed as outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.
Application Against Ms. Arias Montes
4The applicant has failed to provide an address for Ms. Arias Montes. Previous Tribunal decisions have explained that it is the responsibility of the applicant to provide accurate contact information for respondents named in an Application. The Tribunal may dismiss an Application if it is unable to contact respondents named in an Application. See Guild v. Kyle-Jansen, 2008 HRTO 347 and Osman v. Elle Productions Security, 2009 HRTO 1426. See also Rule 6.6 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure.
5The applicant must provide the Tribunal with the address of the remaining respondent so the Tribunal can process this Application. I note also that it is unclear whether the applicant intended to name Ms. Arias Montes personally or as a representative of the Ministry of Transportation since the applicant indicates on his Form 1C that the respondent is the Ministry of Transportation. The applicant must clarify who he intends to name as a respondent – whether it is Ms. Arias Montes, the Ministry of Transportation or both – and he must provide an address for the respondent(s) before the Tribunal can proceed with processing his Application. The applicant may wish to consult the Tribunal’s Practice Direction on Naming Respondents which is available on the Tribunal’s website under “Law, Rules and Policies”.
ORDER
6For the reasons set out above, the Application is dismissed as against Kathleen Wynne and Glenn Murray. The applicant must write to the Tribunal, no later than 7 days from the date of this Interim Decision, to advise specifically whether he intends to name Melisa Arias Montes personally, the Ministry of Transportation or both, and provide an address for her or them. If he fails to do so, the Application may be dismissed for failure to provide required information.
Dated at Toronto, this 23rd day of February, 2015.
“Signed by”
Jo-Anne Pickel
Vice-chair

