Barnaby v. Guido, 2016 HRTO 1522

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Ethan Barnaby

Applicant

-and-

Sam Guido

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Mary Truemner

Date: November 28, 2016

Citation: 2016 HRTO 1522

Indexed as: Barnaby v. Guido

1This is an Application under the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended. The Application is scheduled to be heard on November 29, 2016.

2On June 21, 2016, the Tribunal sent the parties a Notice of Hearing directing them to take certain steps in advance of the hearing. In particular, and among other things, the Notice of Hearing directed the parties to comply with Rules 16 and 17 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure by providing one another with copies of their arguably relevant documents within 21 days of the date of the Notice of Hearing; and by exchanging with one another and filing with the Tribunal the documents they intended to rely upon at the hearing, a list of their witnesses and a summary of their witnesses’ anticipated evidence by no later than October 17, 2016 (i.e. 45 days before the first scheduled day of hearing).

3The applicant did not provide the Tribunal with the materials required under Rules 16 and 17 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure by October 17, 2016.

4Accordingly, in a November 9, 2016 Case Assessment Direction (“CAD”), the Tribunal directed the applicant to provide the required materials to the respondent and the Tribunal by no later than November 16, 2016. In its CAD, the Tribunal warned the applicant that there were serious consequences for the case if the applicant did not comply with the Tribunal’s directions:

If the applicant has not complied with these directions by November 16, 2016, or communicated with the Tribunal at all, the Application may be dismissed as abandoned.

5On November 18, 2016, the respondent emailed the Tribunal, attaching an email sent to the respondent after business hours on November 16, 2016 by the applicant. The applicant did not send it to the Tribunal. The contents of the applicant’s email to the respondent implied that he was not prepared to file any medical documents for the hearing, but the email was silent with respect to his non-compliance with the Tribunal’s Rules and with my CAD of November 9, 2016. I therefore issued another CAD on November 22, 2016, noting that the applicant had not complied with my directions. I noted that he had not delivered to the respondent arguably relevant documents over which he claims no privilege; he had not indicated what documents he intends to rely upon at the hearing and filed them; and he had not filed summaries of what his witnesses will say or filed a confirmation that he has no witnesses but himself and he intends to testify in keeping with his Application.

6I therefore directed, in my November 22, 2016 CAD, that the applicant file, within three (3) days, the documents he was directed to file in my CAD of November 9, 2016. I warned that if he did not, his Application may be dismissed as abandoned.

7The applicant has not complied with my directions in the CAD’s. He has not filed anything as he was directed in the June 21, 2016 Notice of Hearing and my subsequent CAD’s.

8The respondent filed a letter today, seeking to have the Application dismissed as abandoned on the basis of the applicant’s failure to comply with the Tribunal’s directions.

9It is now long past the applicant’s deadline for complying with the Tribunal’s Rules and directions, and the applicant has not filed the required materials with the Tribunal, nor has he communicated with the Tribunal.

10In the circumstances, it appears that the applicant has abandoned the Application. Accordingly, the Application is dismissed as abandoned.

ORDER

11The Application is dismissed as abandoned and the November 29 hearing date is cancelled.