Said v. IIWI Foods Inc., 2016 HRTO 889

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Samir Said

Applicant

-and-

IIWI Foods Inc.

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Ken Bhattacharjee

Date: July 5, 2016

Citation: 2016 HRTO 889

Indexed as: Said v. IIWI Foods Inc.

APPEARANCES

Samir Said, Applicant

No one appearing

IIWI Foods Inc. and Gordon Macleod, Respondents

Rachel Goldenberg, Counsel

McDonald’s Restaurants of Canada Limited, Respondent

Russell Groves, Counsel

1The applicant filed an Application for Contravention of Settlement under s. 45.9 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, but failed to appear for a preliminary hearing. I issued an oral decision dismissing his Application with written reasons to follow. The following are my reasons.

2On February 4, 2016, the applicant filed an Application for Contravention of Settlement against IIWI Foods Inc., Gordon Macleod, and McDonald’s Restaurants of Canada Limited. He attached the Minutes of Settlement which were allegedly contravened, but they were only between him and IIWI Foods Inc.

3On March 3, 2016, the Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction, which directed that a hearing be held to decide whether the Application should be dismissed on a preliminary basis.

4On April 25, 2016, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Preliminary Hearing to the parties by email and regular mail, which informed them that the hearing was scheduled for June 30, 2016 at 9:30 AM. The Notice directed the parties to call a phone number and enter a conference identification number, both of which were provided in the Notice. The Notice also warned the parties that if they failed to attend the hearing, the Tribunal may take a number of steps, including dismissing the Application as abandoned if the applicant failed to attend. The Notice that was sent to the applicant was not returned to the Tribunal as undeliverable.

5On June 30, 2016, the respondents called into the conference call at the time that was set out in the Notice of Preliminary Hearing, but the applicant did not. The Tribunal’s standard practice where a party does not attend is to confirm in the Tribunal’s file that the Hearing Notice was sent to the missing party, and wait half an hour. If the party is still not present, the Tribunal proceeds in the party’s absence without further notice to that party. Where the applicant is not present, this will generally lead to the dismissal of the Application. See Edward v. Moda at Home, 2009 HRTO 568 at para. 2.

6I confirmed in the file that the applicant was aware of the preliminary hearing, and after waiting for half an hour, the hearing proceeded in his absence. I granted the respondents’ request to remove Gordon Macleod and McDonald’s Restaurants of Canada Limited as respondents to the Application because they were not parties to the Minutes of Settlement which were allegedly contravened. The title of proceeding is amended accordingly. I also dismissed the Application against IIWI Foods Inc. because of the applicant’s failure to appear for the preliminary hearing.

7The Tribunal makes the following orders:

1. Gordon Macleod and McDonald’s Restaurants of Canada Limited are removed as respondents to the Application
2. The Application against IIWI Foods Inc. is dismissed.