Cheryl Rovis

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability after his employment was terminated for cause.

The respondent requested dismissal of the application because the applicant had signed a full and final release in exchange for a settlement package.

The Tribunal found that the applicant understood the release, received sufficient consideration, and was not under duress when he signed it.

The Tribunal concluded that allowing the application to proceed would be an abuse of process and dismissed the application.

The applicant alleged discrimination based on race, colour, ancestry, and gender identity by the respondent police services board following his arrest for domestic assault.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application had a reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal found that while the applicant sincerely believed his arrest and the police investigation were tainted by discrimination, he provided no evidence to support this belief.

The application was dismissed as having no reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of age, race, colour, and disability following a workplace injury.

The respondent requested dismissal of the application for delay and for having no reasonable prospect of success.

Following a summary hearing, the Tribunal dismissed the allegations based on age, race, and colour as the applicant provided only bald assertions without pointing to evidence linking the respondent's actions to those grounds.

However, the Tribunal allowed the allegation of discrimination based on disability regarding a specific incident in April 2012 to proceed, finding it timely and sufficiently particularized.

The applicant filed an application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.

A summary hearing was scheduled by teleconference, and the applicant was provided with proper notice.

The applicant failed to attend the hearing or communicate with the Tribunal.

The respondent requested that the application be dismissed as abandoned.

The Tribunal dismissed the application on the basis that the applicant was deemed to have abandoned it.

The applicant, a Black man, alleged discrimination by the London Police Services Board on the basis of race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, ethnic origin, and sex.

He claimed that police officers treated him unfairly and discriminatorily during an investigation into a break and enter at his own home, and later when charging him with a breach of recognizance.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing and dismissed the application, finding that the applicant's claims were speculative and that there was no reasonable prospect he could establish a link between the police officers' actions and his Code-protected characteristics.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, claiming she was denied permanent full-time employment after a medical leave in 2002.

She later amended the application to include allegations of reprisal.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing and dismissed the application in its entirety.

The original allegations were dismissed for delay, as the last alleged incident of discrimination occurred in 2005 and the applicant provided no good faith explanation for the delay.

The reprisal allegations were dismissed as having no reasonable prospect of success, as the applicant had no evidence to establish that the employer's disciplinary actions were intended as retaliation for filing the application.