A human rights complaint against a personal respondent has been dismissed after the tribunal ruled he had not been contacted and the applicant ignored a request to provide his contact information.
But the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario said the portion of the complaint against the employer, U-Haul Moving & Storage of Central Burlington, will proceed.
The applicant, AC, alleged discrimination based on race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, creed, sex, including sexual harassment and pregnancy, within their employment context, citing violations against the Human Rights Code.
Despite the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario’s efforts to contact both the organizational and the personal respondents cited in the application, complications arose primarily with reaching the personal respondent.
On July 13, 2023, the Tribunal initially attempted to deliver the application to both respondents by mail, using an address supplied by the applicant. While U-Haul filed a response by Sept. 18, 2023, after being granted an extension, there was silence from the personal respondent.
Personal respondent no longer with U-Haul
The organizational respondent later clarified that the personal respondent was not under its employment at the time of receiving the application, hence would not represent him.
Subsequently, the Tribunal made a direct attempt to reach the personal respondent by sending another letter on Oct. 26, 2023, demanding a response. Despite these efforts, the Tribunal received no communication from the personal party.
Applicant ignored request for contact info
Further complications arose when the Tribunal reached out to the applicant, requesting updated and accurate contact information for the personal respondent. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of this information to proceed with the application against the individual, highlighting the applicant’s responsibility to ensure accurate contact data.
“It is the responsibility of the applicant to provide, and in some cases, confirm accurate contact information,” the Tribunal said.
Despite these directives, the applicant failed to respond within the provided deadline.
Due to these circumstances, the Tribunal noted, “I am not satisfied that the personal respondent received notice of the Application or the Tribunal’s letter,” signifying a crucial gap in the procedural requirements. As a result, the application against the personal respondent was dismissed due to lack of adequate contact and response.
However, the case against the organizational respondent remains active and will continue through the Tribunal’s processes.
For more information, see Clarke v. U-Haul Moving & Storage of Central Burlington, 2024 HRTO 329 (CanLII).
