Sofia Kitsis v. Di-Cut Industries Ltd., 2016 HRTO 680

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Sofia Kitsis Applicant

-and-

Di-Cut Industries Ltd. Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Ken Bhattacharjee Date: May 18, 2016 Citation: 2016 HRTO 680 Indexed as: Kitsis v. Di-Cut Industries Ltd.

1The purpose of this Interim Decision is to address whether the Application against the respondent is stayed because of a bankruptcy proceeding, and to provide a direction to the applicant.

2On July 21, 2015, the applicant filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”).

3On February 23, 2016, the respondent’s counsel filed various bankruptcy documents, including the Notice of Bankruptcy, First Meeting of Creditors issued by the trustee of the estate of the respondent.

4Section 69 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3, as amended (the “BIA”), provides that no creditor has any remedy against the insolvent person or the insolvent person’s property, or shall commence or continue any action, execution or other proceedings, for the recovery of a claim provable in bankruptcy.

5In light of the above, it appears that proceedings against the respondent under the Code, including the Application at hand, are stayed pursuant to s. 69 of the BIA.

6Within two weeks of the date of this Interim Decision, the applicant shall send the Tribunal’s Registrar and the respondent a letter or an email, which confirms whether or not she intends to bring a motion in court to have the stay lifted. If she fails to follow this direction, the Tribunal will likely deem the Application to be abandoned and dismiss it.

7I am not seized of this matter.