Fragkopoulos v. Meditskos, 2016 HRTO 933

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Maria Fragkopoulos

Applicant

-and-

George Meditskos

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Jennifer Khurana

Date: July 15, 2016

Citation: 2016 HRTO 933

Indexed as: Fragkopoulos v. Meditskos

APPEARANCES

Maria Fragkopoulos, Applicant

Timothy Kinnaird, Counsel

George Meditskos, Respondent

Self-represented

Introduction

1This is a Contravention of Settlement Application (“Application”) filed under s.45.9 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”). The applicant alleges that the respondent failed to pay damages agreed to in Minutes of Settlement signed by the parties on September 8, 2015 in settlement of a previous Application.

PRELIMINARY ISSUES

Adjournment Request

2Less than two hours before the start of the hearing scheduled for 9:30 a.m., the respondent sent a Request for an Order During Proceedings (“Request”), asking the Tribunal to adjourn the hearing for the same reasons that motivated two previous Requests he filed on June 29, 2016 and July 11, 2016 and which I refused in Interim Decisions 2016 HRTO 893 and 2016 HRTO 919. The respondent attached a copy of the civil claim and Schedule, as well as a photo related to a matter he is pursuing before the Superior Court of Justice against the applicant, her spouse and a third individual.

3I denied the adjournment request orally at the outset of the hearing without calling on the applicant. The respondent’s latest Request raises the same issues as his previous Requests. Nothing in the respondent’s latest Request persuaded me there was any basis to adjourn this hearing.

ANALYSIS

4I find that the respondent has breached the settlement entered into by the parties by failing to pay the $3,000 in general damages he agreed to pay the applicant.

5The respondent does not dispute that there was a settlement agreement between the parties and that he has not paid the applicant the money he agreed to pay. According to paragraph [1] of the Minutes of Settlement the applicant provided with her Application, the respondent agreed to pay the applicant $3,000 in general damages by no later than October 21, 2015.

6The respondent testified that he is under significant financial strain and that he has incurred considerable debt. He operates a business which is seasonal and has cash flow problems. He anticipates that he will start to generate revenue in September and testified that he earned somewhere between $30,000 and $50,000 the past year. The applicant contests the respondent’s evidence that he could not pay her the $3,000 she is owed and submits that if the respondent has had to pay overhead and other business expenses, he can also afford to honour the terms of the settlement.

7I acknowledge the respondent’s evidence that he is under financial pressure, however the respondent’s financial situation does not excuse him from meeting his obligations under a binding settlement with an applicant. See Kim v. 1743766 Ontario Inc., 2015 HRTO 685. I also note the public and private interest in complying with settlement terms and that the applicant is entitled to rely on the agreement and to expect to be paid the money the respondent agreed to pay.

8In the Application, the applicant requested payment of the $3,000 she is owed further to the Minutes of Settlement as well as $1,000 in legal costs. At the hearing, her legal representative acknowledged that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to order costs. The applicant did not request a monetary remedy for the breach or lead evidence about any damages flowing from the breach. The applicant asked that the Tribunal order the respondent to pay the money she is owed pursuant to the Minutes of Settlement.

9The respondent offered to pay the applicant in instalments in September when he hopes that his cash flow will improve. The applicant explained that after two years she wants this dispute to end. She has two young children, has had to incur legal fees, and cannot afford not to recover the monies she is owed.

10In light of the above, I find that the applicant is entitled to an order requiring the respondent to immediately pay the $3,000 owing under the Minutes of Settlement, together with pre-judgment interest at an interest rate of 2% from the date by which the payment was to be made, namely October 21, 2015. I also find that the applicant is entitled to post-judgment interest at a rate of 2% to be calculated from the date of this Decision pursuant to s. 129 of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43.

ORDER

11The Application for Contravention of Settlement is granted. The respondent shall immediately pay the following amounts to the applicant by certified cheque or money order:

a. The $3,000 still owing to the applicant under the terms of the settlement; and

b. Pre-judgement interest from October 21, 2015 to the date of this Decision calculated at a rate of 2% per annum in accordance with the Courts of Justice Act.

c. Post-judgment interest from the date of this Decision calculated at a rate of 2% per annum in accordance with the Courts of Justice Act.