Allison Armstrong v. Nicholson Legal Services and Glynis Nicholson, 2016 HRTO 624

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Allison Armstrong

Applicant

-and-

Nicholson Legal Services and Glynis Nicholson

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Dawn J. Kershaw
Date: May 10, 2016
Citation: 2016 HRTO 624
Indexed as: Armstrong v. Nicholson Legal Services

1The applicant filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), on July 16, 2013.

2In Interim Decision 2014 HRTO 128 issued January 20, 2014, the Tribunal deferred proceeding with this Application pending the conclusion of an ongoing Small Claims Court proceeding.

3On January 20, 2016 the Tribunal wrote to the applicant. The applicant was asked to inform the Registrar in writing within 30 days of the date of the letter whether the other proceedings remained ongoing and, if possible, to indicate when they were expected to be completed. The letter went on to warn the applicant that failure to provide the requested information might result in the Tribunal dismissing the Application as abandoned.

4The Tribunal then sent the same letter to the applicant by e-mail, dated February 26, 2016, requesting that the applicant respond by no later than March 4, 2016.

5The applicant responded on February 28, 2016 by e-mail advising that the personal respondent had passed away.

6On March 3, 2016 the Tribunal again e-mailed the applicant to ask if she intended to proceed against the other respondent, Nicholson Legal Services, and whether the Small Claims Court proceeding was ongoing.

7On April 19, 2016 the Tribunal again e-mailed the applicant requesting that she respond to the March 3, 2016 e-mail within 14 days or the Application may be dismissed.

8The applicant has not responded to the Tribunal’s March 3 or April 19, 2016 e-mails. The Tribunal’s e-mails to the applicant have not been returned as undeliverable, and in fact the applicant responded to its February 26, 2016 e-mail delivered to the same e-mail address.

9In the circumstances, the applicant is deemed to have abandoned the Application and the Application is dismissed.