Case snapshot
At a glance
- Case
- Can Ontario's HRTO Reopen a Dismissed Human Rights Case?
- Court / Tribunal
- Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
- Citation
- 2026 HRTO 1506 (CanLII) ↗
- Date
- October 7, 2026
- Area of law
- Employment Law
- Key issue
- Whether the HRTO should grant reconsideration of a dismissal for abandonment where the applicant's failure to respond to tribunal communications was linked to confusion over her representative's role and a potential conflict of interest involving that representative.
- Outcome
- The HRTO granted the reconsideration request, rescinded the earlier dismissal for abandonment, and ordered the human rights application to continue through the tribunal's regular process.
- Why it matters
- If your HRTO application is dismissed because deadlines were missed — especially when a lawyer or representative was involved — you may have grounds to ask the tribunal to reopen your case.
Legal principle
The rule from this case
When the HRTO considers whether to dismiss a human rights application as abandoned, it must look carefully at whether the applicant's failure to respond was truly a sign of disinterest — or whether it resulted from problems with how their representative handled communications. Ontario's Divisional Court in *Royal LePage RCR Realty Brokerage v. Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario*, 2025 ONSC 6276, held that a tribunal cannot automatically treat a party as having abandoned their case simply because correspondence sent to their lawyer went unanswered, particularly where the lawyer's own conduct may have been part of the problem. The HRTO also requires that parties receive a clear warning that non-compliance could lead to dismissal before that dismissal actually happens. A single warning buried in a follow-up letter, combined with communication breakdowns caused by a representative, may not be enough to justify closing a file permanently.
Important limits
What this does not mean
This decision does not mean that HRTO applicants can ignore deadlines without consequence. The tribunal still expects parties and their representatives to respond to correspondence promptly and to keep their contact information current. Reconsideration is a discretionary remedy — the tribunal is not required to reopen every dismissed file, and each situation is assessed on its own facts. The decision also does not create a blanket rule that a lawyer's failure to pass along communications will always save an applicant from dismissal. The outcome here turned on a specific combination of factors: confusion about how the tribunal routes correspondence, a potential conflict of interest involving the representative, and the applicant's prompt and active engagement once the dismissal was issued.
Can the HRTO Reopen a Case That Was Dismissed as Abandoned?
Yes — the HRTO has the power to reopen a dismissed application through a process called reconsideration, and a 2026 decision confirms that dismissal for abandonment is not always the final word. In Kang v. Public Service Alliance of Canada, 2026 HRTO 1506 (CanLII) (full decision), the tribunal rescinded an earlier abandonment ruling and allowed a wide-ranging discrimination and reprisal claim to continue.
Understanding how this happened — and why — matters if you or someone you know has had an HRTO application dismissed.
What Does “Abandoned” Mean at the HRTO?
A case is treated as abandoned when the tribunal concludes the applicant no longer intends to pursue it. This usually happens when deadlines are missed and there is no communication from the applicant or their representative. The HRTO has the authority to dismiss applications on this basis, but Ontario’s Divisional Court has said the tribunal must exercise that power carefully and not simply infer abandonment from silence alone (see Royal LePage, 2025 ONSC 6276).
In this case, the applicant was required to file a written reply addressing concerns raised in the respondents’ response — including a potential conflict of interest involving her own lawyer. She missed two deadlines and the tribunal dismissed her application as abandoned in July 2026.
Why Did the HRTO Agree to Reconsider the Dismissal?
The tribunal agreed to reconsider because the applicant had a credible explanation for why she did not respond: she never received the communications in the first place. When she filed her application, she listed a lawyer as her representative and selected an option that directed all tribunal correspondence to that lawyer’s email address only — not to her own.
The applicant said she did not fully understand that this choice would cut off her own access to tribunal communications. She also raised concerns that her representative may have had a conflict of interest with one of the respondents, which could have affected how he handled her file. The tribunal found these circumstances, taken together, were enough to satisfy the reconsideration standard under Rule 26.5(d) — that other factors outweigh the public interest in finality.
Does a Lawyer’s Conduct Affect Whether a Case Can Be Dismissed?
Yes, and this is one of the most practically significant aspects of the decision. The tribunal drew on guidance from Ontario’s Divisional Court, which has held that it is unreasonable to treat a party as having abandoned their case when the real problem lies with how their lawyer handled communications. Dismissing a case permanently because of a representative’s failure — without more — can be unfair to the applicant who had no direct knowledge of what was happening.
This does not mean applicants are off the hook for their representatives’ mistakes in every situation. But it does mean the HRTO must look at the full picture before concluding someone has walked away from their claim.
Is One Warning Enough Before the HRTO Dismisses a Case?
Based on this decision, probably not — at least not in combination with other complicating factors. The tribunal noted that only the second of two letters explicitly warned the applicant that her case could be dismissed for abandonment. The first letter contained no such warning, yet the second letter referred back to it as though the warning had already been given.
When assessing abandonment, the tribunal must be satisfied that the applicant had genuine notice of the consequences of non-compliance. A single, somewhat ambiguous warning — sent only to a representative who may not have passed it along — did not clear that bar here.
What Happened to the Conflict of Interest Issue?
Once the reconsideration was granted, the conflict of interest question became moot. The applicant confirmed that the lawyer in question was no longer representing her. With that representative out of the picture, the concern raised by the respondents about his prior relationship with one of them no longer needed to be addressed. The case will now proceed through the tribunal’s regular process with the applicant representing herself.
This outcome is a reminder that resolving a representation problem — even after a dismissal — can be an important step in getting a case back on track.
Questions and Records to Discuss with a Lawyer
If your HRTO application has been dismissed, or if you are worried about missing a deadline, consider gathering the following before speaking with a lawyer:
- A timeline of all communications you received (or did not receive) from the HRTO, including dates and how they were sent
- Any correspondence between you and your former or current representative about the file
- A copy of the dismissal decision and any reconsideration deadlines it references
- Documentation of any circumstances — health, personal, or otherwise — that affected your ability to participate in the proceeding
- Any evidence that your representative may have had a conflict of interest or failed to keep you informed
Our Ontario employment lawyers regularly advise clients navigating human rights complaints, including situations where a case has stalled or been dismissed. If your matter involves a workplace in the Hamilton or Burlington area, our Hamilton employment law team may also be able to assist.
If you have questions about your own situation, you are welcome to reach out to UL Lawyers through /connect to discuss your circumstances.
This article is automated commentary on a public court decision and is for general information only — not legal advice. Decisions rely on facts unique to each case. If you are affected by a similar issue, contact a lawyer for advice specific to your situation.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
The HRTO's Rules of Procedure set out specific timelines for reconsideration requests. In this case, the applicant filed within about a month of the dismissal. You should review the rules or speak with a lawyer promptly after receiving a dismissal decision, as missing the reconsideration deadline can affect your options.
A conflict of interest involving your representative can be a relevant factor if the HRTO is considering whether to dismiss your case for abandonment. The tribunal is expected to look carefully at whether a representative's conduct — including a potential conflict — contributed to any failure to respond to tribunal communications.
Yes. Parties are permitted to represent themselves at the HRTO, and self-represented applicants are common. If you change representatives or decide to proceed on your own, you should notify the tribunal promptly so that communications are directed to you directly.