Burkart v. Sexual Assault Centre for Quinte and District, 2016 HRTO 1006

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

BETWEEN:

Wayne Burkart Applicant

-and-

Sexual Assault Centre for Quinte and District Respondent

Decision

Adjudicator: Keith Brennenstuhl Date: July 29, 2016 Citation: 2016 HRTO 1006 Indexed as: Burkart v. Sexual Assault Centre for Quinte and District

Appearances

Wayne Burkart, Applicant No one appearing

Sexual Assault Centre for Quinte and District, Respondent Suzanne Hunt, Counsel

1The applicant filed an Application alleging that the respondent discriminated against him contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990 c. H. 19, as amended (the “Code”).

2By Case Assessment Direction (“CAD”), dated January 19, 2016, the Tribunal directed that a summary hearing be held to address whether the Application should be dismissed on the basis that there is no reasonable prospect that it will succeed and/or on the basis that the Application is untimely. In its CAD, the Tribunal directed that the summary hearing would proceed by way of teleconference and advised the parties that a Notice of Summary Hearing would be sent to them by the Registrar’s office.

3The Notice of Summary Hearing was sent to the parties May 27, 2016, advising that the summary hearing would commence at 1:30 p.m. on July 26, 2016. The Notice of Summary hearing also advised the parties how to connect to the teleconference. The Notice of Summary Hearing was mailed and emailed to the applicant at the addresses provided by him to the Tribunal and was not returned as undeliverable.

4The Summary Hearing was convened by teleconference on July 26, 2016, at the scheduled time. The respondent attended the summary hearing and was represented by counsel. The applicant did not attend the hearing.

5I advised those present on the call that the hearing would commence at 2:00 p.m. or when the applicant attended on the call, whichever occurred first.

6By 2:00 p.m., the applicant had still not attended on the call.

7I was satisfied at the hearing that the applicant had received timely and proper notice of the summary hearing. The Notice of Summary Hearing was sent to the applicant at the addresses provided by him and not returned.

8I am not aware of the Tribunal having received any indication that the applicant would not be attending the summary hearing. Nor did the applicant indicate to the respondent that he was unable to attend the summary hearing.

9In the absence of the applicant or any explanation for his failure to attend the hearing, I dismissed the Application as abandoned at the hearing.

Order

10The Application is dismissed.