Cheryachukin v. Target Canada, 2016 HRTO 1418

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Yury Cheryachukin Applicant

-and-

Target Canada Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Douglas Sanderson Date: November 2, 2016 Citation: 2016 HRTO 1418 Indexed as: Cheryachukin v. Target Canada

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Yury Cheryachukin, Applicant

No one appearing

Target Canada, Respondent

John Conforti, Counsel

1This Application, filed under the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), alleges discrimination with respect to employment because of place of origin, ethnic origin and reprisal.

2The Tribunal scheduled this matter for a summary hearing in February 2015. The Tribunal cancelled the hearing because all proceedings had been stayed as against the respondent, pursuant to the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-36 (“CCAA”).

3By letter dated September 15, 2016, counsel for the respondent’s Court-appointed monitor filed with the Tribunal and delivered to the applicant correspondence that provided an update regarding the CCAA proceeding. Counsel for the monitor submitted that, pursuant to the Claims Procedure Order granted by the Court, the applicant’s claim against the respondent in this Application was extinguished. Counsel for the monitor also submitted that a full and final release had been provided to the respondent in the CCAA proceedings that also prevented the applicant from continuing with this Application. Finally, counsel for the monitor advised that a stay remained in place regarding legal proceedings against the respondent and that the stay was expected to be renewed in the near future.

4By letter dated September 26, 2016, the Tribunal directed the applicant to respond to the letter from the Court-appointed monitor. The letter warned the applicant that if he did not respond within 14 days of the date of the letter, then the Tribunal may dismiss the Application as abandoned.

5As of the date of this Decision, the applicant has not responded to the letter from the Court appointed monitor. In the circumstances, it appears that the applicant has abandoned the Application.

6The Application is dismissed.