Chopra v. Intertechnique Hair Salons Inc., 2016 HRTO 765

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Mukesh Chopra

Applicant

-and-

Intertechnique Hair Salons Inc. o/a Donato Salon & Spa

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Alison Renton

Date: June 3, 2016

Citation: 2016 HRTO 765

Indexed as: Chopra v. Intertechnique Hair Salons Inc.

1This Application alleges discrimination with respect to services because of race, colour, ethnic origin, and age contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”).

2The respondent has filed a Response denying the allegations against it.

3A Notice of Hearing dated February 18, 2016 was issued to the parties by the Tribunal, scheduling the hearing for June 29 and 30, 2016 (“the Notice”). The Notice was sent out by regular mail and email to the applicant’s addresses as indicated on his Application and was not returned to the Tribunal as being undeliverable. The Notice set out the parties’ disclosure obligations in accordance with Rules 16 and 17 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure (“the Rules”).

4The respondent complied with its disclosure obligations, but the applicant did not.

5The Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction dated May 20, 2016 (“CAD”) in which it directed the applicant to comply with his disclosure obligations by May 30, 2016, at 5:00 p.m. At paragraph 9, the Tribunal warned the applicant that if he did not comply with these directions or communicate with the Tribunal at all, then his Application may be dismissed as abandoned. The CAD was sent by regular mail and email to the applicant, again to the addresses on file, and was not returned to the Tribunal as being undeliverable.

6The applicant has not complied with the Tribunal’s directions in the CAD or otherwise communicated with the Tribunal. In such circumstances, where an applicant does not comply with the Tribunal’s directions set out in a CAD or communicate with the Tribunal, the Tribunal has dismissed the application as abandoned. See, for example, D’Alesio v. Romarah Incorporated, 2016 HRTO 733; Killeleagh v. 2274332 Ontario Inc., 2016 HRTO 334.

7Accordingly, the Application dismissed as abandoned and the June 29 and 30, 2016 hearing dates are cancelled.