HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Brian Comeau
Applicant
-and-
Vertica Property Management Services
Respondent
AND BETWEEN
Brian Comeau
Applicant
-and-
Vertica Resident Services
Respondent
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Josée Bouchard
Indexed as: Comeau v. Vertica Property Management Services
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Brian Comeau, Applicant
Shibil Siddiqi, Counsel
Vertica Property Management Services and Vertica Resident Services, Respondents
Susan McCorquodale, Counsel
1This Interim Decision addresses the applicant’s request to amend Applications 2015-22923-I and 2016-23221-I. On April 5, 2016, the Tribunal consolidated the Applications.
2The applicant filed two Applications alleging discrimination with respect to housing and goods, services and facilities because of disability contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H. 19, as amended (the “Code”). Specifically, the applicant alleged that the respondents discriminated against him by failing to provide accessible housing.
3On November 17, 2017, the applicant filed a request to amend the monetary compensation sought in the Applications to $25,000.00 for the treatment of the applicant and lack of interest in resolving his situation.
4On November 29, 2017, the respondents filed a Response to the request to amend the Applications indicating that they take no position with respect to the Order requested.
decision
5In determining requests to amend applications, the Tribunal generally considers the nature of the proposed amendments, the reasons for the amendments, the timing of the request to amend, and the prejudice to the respondent. See, for example, Dube v. Canadian Career College, 2008 HRTO 336; Wozenilek v. 7-Eleven Canada Inc., 2009 HRTO 926.
6Having considered the factors set out above, I grant the applicant’s request to amend the monetary compensation sought in his Application. The Tribunal has regularly granted requests to amend remedies up to the date of the hearing. See, for example, Marino v. Compuware Corporation of Canada, 2011 HRTO 1390, and Loney v. Combusco Enterprises, 2011 HRTO 1050.
order
7For the reasons set out above, the Tribunal orders as follows:
a. the applicant’s request to amend the Application is granted; and
b. the Application is amended to replace the monetary compensation sought from $150.00 to $25,000.00 for the treatment of the applicant and lack of interest in resolving his situation.
Dated at Toronto, this 21st day of December, 2017.
“Signed by”
Josée Bouchard
Vice-chair