Kelsey Orth

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application should be dismissed for delay and lack of a reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal found that the allegations relating to events prior to the applicant's lay-off were filed out of time without a good faith explanation for the delay.

The remaining timely allegation, that the respondent objected to the applicant seeking a WSIB specialist appointment, was dismissed as having no reasonable prospect of success because there was no evidence linking the objection to the applicant's disability.

The applicant filed a human rights application but failed to attend the third day of the hearing on the merits.

The respondents and intervenor attended and requested that the application be dismissed with costs.

The Tribunal found that the applicant was aware of the hearing date but chose not to attend, deeming the application abandoned.

The application was dismissed.

The Tribunal noted it has no statutory authority to award costs, but suggested the respondents could bill the applicant and raise the issue if the applicant seeks reconsideration.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of race, colour, ethnic origin, and sex after he was not interviewed for a Lawyer Assistant position.

The applicant claimed he attended the respondent's office for a scheduled interview but was told he had no appointment, and observed only non-Caucasian female staff in the reception area.

The respondent explained that the applicant had been given the address for the wrong office location by mistake.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing and dismissed the application, finding no reasonable prospect of success as the applicant offered no evidence to rebut the respondent's explanation or to show the respondent was aware of his personal characteristics when the error occurred.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal on the grounds of sex and age, related to pay equity concerns.

She had previously filed a complaint with the Pay Equity Commission.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer the application pending the resolution of the pay equity complaint.

The respondents supported deferral, while the applicant did not file submissions.

The Tribunal ordered the deferral of the application to avoid concurrent proceedings, inconsistent findings, and potential double recovery, as the matters significantly overlapped.