Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
B E T W E E N:
Liette Ranger
Applicant
-and-
City of Greater Sudbury (Pioneer Manor LTC)
Respondents
-and-
Canadian Union of Public Employees Local 148
Intervenor
DECISION
Adjudicator: Douglas Sanderson
Indexed as: Ranger v. City of Greater Sudbury (Pioneer Manor LTC)
APPEARANCES
Liette Ranger, Applicant
No one appearing
1This is an Application alleging discrimination contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended.
background
2The Tribunal scheduled a mediation session in this matter for October 6, 2017. By correspondence filed July 13, 2017, the intervenor requested that the Tribunal reschedule the mediation. By email dated July 13, 2017, the Tribunal sent the parties instructions to reschedule the mediation.
3By letter dated July 21, 2017, the intervenor advised that both the intervenor and the respondent were available for mediation on dates in November and December 2017. The intervenor advised that it contacted the applicant but had not received a response from her.
4By letter dated July 21, 2017, the Tribunal directed the applicant to advise it regarding her intentions with respect to the Application. The Tribunal advised the applicant that if she wished to proceed with the Application, she had to respond by July 31, 2017 and provide dates for rescheduling. The applicant did not respond to the Tribunal’s letter.
5In a Case Assessment Direction dated September 8, 2017, the Tribunal directed the applicant to advise the Tribunal whether she intends to proceed with this Application. If she intended to proceed, the Tribunal directed the applicant to advise the Tribunal in writing regarding whether she is available on any of the dates proposed by the intervenor for a rescheduled mediation. If she was not available for those dates, the Tribunal directed the applicant to contact the intervenor and the respondent, determine five dates on which all three parties are available for a rescheduled mediation and provide these five dates to the Tribunal.
6The Tribunal warned the applicant that if the she did not comply with these directions by September 15, 2017, then the Tribunal will dismiss her Application as abandoned.
7As of the date of this Decision, the applicant has neither responded to the Case Assessment Direction of September 8, 2017 nor communicated with the Tribunal. Consequently, it appears the applicant has abandoned the Application.
8The Application is dismissed.
Dated at Toronto, this 27th day of September, 2017.
"Signed by"
Douglas Sanderson
Vice-chair