HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Richard Alfred Decosse
Applicant
-and-
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of
Community and Social Services and the City of Greater Sudbury
Respondents
DECISION
Adjudicator: Laurie Letheren
Indexed as: Decosse v. Ontario (Community and Social Services)
APPEARANCES
Richard Alfred Decosse, Applicant
No one appearing
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Community and Social Services, Respondent
No one appearing
City of Greater Sudbury, Respondent
Michel R. Carre, Counsel
1This Application alleges discrimination with respect to services contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”). The Application was filed on December 28, 2016.
2On March 30, 2017, the respondent City of Greater Sudbury filed its Response. It asked that the Tribunal dismiss this Application against it on the basis that the allegations made in the Application do not involve any service relationship that it may have with the applicant. It further submits that the applicant has failed to plead any facts or allegations against it.
3On April 7, 2017, the respondent Ministry of Community and Social Services (“the Ministry”) filed its Response. In this Response, the Ministry made a request that the Tribunal dismiss the Application on the basis that it had no reasonable prospect of success.
4The parties were sent a Notice of Summary Hearing dated May 17, 2017. The Notice provided details of the date and time of the Summary Hearing and the instructions for calling in to the teleconference.
5The Summary Hearing was convened by teleconference on July 26, 2017, at 9:30 a.m. Neither the applicant nor the Ministry attended on the telephone hearing at 9:30 a.m. The City of Greater Sudbury did join the teleconference by 9:30 a.m.
6The Tribunal had not received any correspondence from the parties that they would not be attending.
7I waited 30 minutes in order to give the applicant and the Ministry an opportunity to participate in the hearing. At 10:00 a.m., only the City of Greater Sudbury was present on the telephone call.
8I am satisfied that the applicant and the respondent Ministry received timely and proper notice of the Summary Hearing. The Notice was sent to the addresses these parties had provided and they were not returned as undeliverable.
9As a result of the applicant’s failure to attend at the Summary Hearing, I am dismissing the Application as abandoned.
ORDER
10The Application is dismissed.
Dated at Toronto, this 28th day of July, 2017.
“Signed by”
Laurie Letheren
Vice-chair