Brian Kelsey

The complainant brought a motion to amend his human rights complaint to add allegations of reprisal and family status discrimination.

The Commission brought a motion to allow a witness residing in Germany to testify by speaker telephone.

The Board of Inquiry granted both motions.

The Board found it had jurisdiction to amend the complaint as the respondents had adequate notice of the factual issues and would not be prejudiced.

The Board also interpreted section 5.2 of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act as permitting parts of a hearing to be conducted electronically, finding that the respondents failed to establish significant prejudice from the witness testifying by telephone.

The respondent school boards brought a motion to rule that the Board of Inquiry Interim Rules of Practice did not apply to the hearing and to quash summonses served on their Directors of Education.

The adjudicator held that the 1994 amendments to the Human Rights Code and the Interim Rules applied because the hearing had been reassigned to a new panel.

The adjudicator set aside the summonses as overly broad but ordered the respondents to disclose specific, arguably relevant documents relating to the disputed job competitions, including minutes of meetings where decisions were made.

The adjudicator rejected the respondents' claim of social privilege over the board minutes and found the claim of solicitor-client privilege premature.

The complainant requested an adjournment of the human rights proceedings pending an application for judicial review of a prior decision that confirmed the adjudicator's jurisdiction to hear the matter.

The Commission and the respondents opposed the adjournment.

The adjudicator granted the adjournment, finding that the balance of convenience favoured it because a successful judicial review would require the entire matter to be reheard, and there was a possibility of minimizing delay by having the judicial review heard together with a similar pending case.

The Ontario Human Rights Commission brought a preliminary motion to add the Ministry of Education and Training and Mr. André Lalonde as respondents to two human rights complaints regarding job competitions.

The complaints were originally filed against the Metropolitan Toronto School Board and the CEFCUT.

The Board of Inquiry dismissed the motion, finding it premature to add the Ministry or Mr. Lalonde in his personal capacity given the lack of evidence that Mr. Lalonde was acting as an employee of the Ministry rather than the school boards during his secondment, and considering the significant delay since the complaints were filed.