HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

______________________________________________________________________
B E T W E E N:
Keith Alexander

2020 HRTO 22 (CanLII)

Applicant

-and-

Longo Brothers Fruit Market Inc.

and Anthony Longo
Respondents

______________________________________________________________________

DECISION
______________________________________________________________________

Adjudicator: Darren Thorne

Date: January 10, 2020

File Number: 2014-18384-I

Citation: 2020 HRTO 22

Indexed as: Alexander v. Longo Brothers Fruit Market Inc.

______________________________________________________________________
 APPEARANCES

)
Keith Alexander, Applicant ) No one appearing
)

2020 HRTO 22 (CanLII)

)

)
Longo Brothers Fruit Market Inc. and ) Paul Wearing, Counsel
Anthony Longo, Respondents )
)

2
[1] This Application, filed under the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as
amended (the “Code”), alleges discrimination with respect to employment because of
race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, ethnic origin, gender identity and age.

[2] The Tribunal deferred this matter pending the resolution of a related civil action

2020 HRTO 22 (CanLII)

proceeding before the Superior Court of Ontario (CV-14-511875). See 2015 HRTO 37,
dated January 12, 2015. On May 8, 2019, the applicant filed a Request for an Order
During Proceedings requesting reactivation of the Application following the conclusion
of the Court proceeding, which he indicated was settled.

[3] On May 21, 2019 the respondents filed a Response to a Request for an Order
objecting to reactivation and requesting that the application be dismissed. The
respondents submitted that as part of the settlement, the applicant had executed a Full
and Final Release on November 2, 2017 in favour of the organizational respondent that
bars him from proceeding with this Application.

[4] The Tribunal scheduled a preliminary hearing by teleconference for January 8,

2020, commencing at 9:30 a.m., to address 1) whether the Application should be
dismissed as an abuse of process given the settlement and release; and 2) whether the
Application should be dismissed because of delay in requesting the reactivation of the
Application.

[5] The applicant did not attend the hearing. In accordance with its usual practice,
the Tribunal waited until 10:00 a.m. until proceeding with the hearing. It was the position
of the respondents that the Tribunal should dismiss the Application as abandoned.

[6] I am satisfied that the applicant had notice of the hearing. On November 5, 2019,
the Tribunal sent a Notice of Preliminary Hearing (the “Notice”) to the address and email
the applicant has used in correspondence with the Tribunal and there is no indication
that the document was undelivered. The Notice set out the potential consequences of
failing to attend the hearing, which included that the Tribunal may “dismiss the
Application as abandoned” if the applicant does not attend. Accordingly, the applicant

3
knew or ought to have known that the Application could be dismissed if he failed to
attend the preliminary hearing.

[7] In view of the applicant’s non-attendance, the Application is dismissed as

abandoned.

2020 HRTO 22 (CanLII)

ORDER

[8] For the above reasons, the Application is dismissed.

Dated at Toronto, this 10th day of January, 2020.

“Signed by”
__________________________________
Darren Thorne
Vice-chair