P.G. v. 2375541 Ontario Inc., 2016 HRTO 1290

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

P.G.

Applicant

-and-

2375541 Ontario Inc.

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Brian Cook

Date: October 4, 2016

Citation: 2016 HRTO 1290

Indexed as: PG v. 2375541 Ontario Inc.

1This Decision concerns an Application filed under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”).

2The Application as filed named Baton Rouge Restaurant as the respondent. The Tribunal held a hearing and the respondent did not appear. The applicant was allowed to clarify the legal name of the respondent post-hearing. The applicant advised that the legal name of the respondent was Groupe Restaurant Imvescor Restaurant Group Inc. (“Imvescor”)

3Following a hearing, the Tribunal issued Decision 2016 HRTO 500. Based on the information provided by the applicant, the Decision identified Imvescor as the respondent. Imvescor filed a Request for Reconsideration on the basis that it was not a proper respondent to the Application and, in addition, had no notice of the hearing or the Application. Imvescor further advised that the correct respondent was a numbered Ontario corporation which was bankrupt.

4The Tribunal scheduled a hearing by telephone conference call. The hearing was held on September 30, 2016. The applicant participated with his representative, Brenda Culbert from the Human Rights Legal Support Centre. Jeffery Kerbel is the Trustee in Bankruptcy for the numbered company identified as the proper respondent. Mr. Kerbel participated in the hearing. Imvescor did not participate because the day before the hearing, it reached a settlement with the applicant. The parties to the settlement are the applicant and Imvescor. As part of the settlement, the parties asked the Tribunal to issue this Consent Order.

5A Tribunal Form 25 has been filed, signed by the applicant and representatives for Imvescor. The numbered company is not a party to the Form 25. However, as the trustee in bankruptcy for the numbered company, Mr. Kerbel confirmed at the hearing that he agrees with the Consent Order proposed by the other parties. Mr. Kerbel advised that while the numbered company still legally exists, for all practical purposes it is defunct. Its assets have been sold and were not sufficient to cover its secured creditors.

6In the circumstances, the Tribunal agrees that the Consent Order is appropriate. The Tribunal therefore orders as follows:

1. Groupe Restaurant Imvescor Restaurant Group Inc. is removed as a respondent to the Application.

2. The Tribunal’s April 18, 2016 Decision 2014-19103-I is amended to:

a. Remove Groupe Restaurant Imvescor Restaurant Group Inc. as a respondent to the Application; and

b. Name 2375541 Ontario Inc. as the respondent to the Application.