Ontario Human Rights Commission v. Douglas Gillies and Hillcrest Variety
B E T W E E N :
Ontario Human Rights Commission
Commission
-and-
Corrine L. Colvin and Barbara Jackson
Complainants
-and-
Douglas Gillies and Hillcrest Variety
Respondents
interim DECISION
Adjudicator: Mary Ross Hendriks
Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
400 University Avenue, 7th Floor
Toronto ON M7A 1T7
Phone (416) 314-0004 Fax: (416) 314-8743 Toll free 1-800-668-3946
TTY (416) 314-2379 / 1-800-424-1168
APPEARANCES
Ontario Human Rights Commission ) Eddie Taylor, Counsel
Corrine L. Colvin and ) On their own behalf
Barbara Jackson, Complainants )
Douglas Gillies and ) Douglas Gillies and Mary Gillies
Hillcrest Variety, Respondents ) )
INTRODUCTION
1These are the Tribunal’s Reasons and Order for its Interim Decision concerning the disposition of a motion brought by the Ontario Human Rights Commission (the “Commission”) and by the Complainants for leave to change the venue of this hearing from Thunder Bay to Atikokan, Ontario.
2The Commission and the Complainants brought this motion because, save for Commission counsel and the Tribunal, all of the participants in this hearing, being the two Complainants, the corporate and personal Respondents, and an estimated eighteen witnesses, all reside in Atikokan.
3The motion was heard by the Tribunal during the pre-hearing conference call of September 22, 2003. The Respondents consented to the request that the venue be changed to Atikokan.
4During this conference call, the Tribunal also heard the request of the Respondents that they be granted a further indulgence to serve and file their pleadings and to make disclosure. The Respondents have missed two previous deadlines directed by the Tribunal in this respect. Ms Gillies asked the Tribunal for this indulgence, due to recent surgery that left her in a state of recovery for the last six weeks.
THE MOTION
5The Commission seeks an Order from the Tribunal as follows: that the venue for the hearing of these matters on their merits be changed to Atikokan, Ontario, based on the balance of convenience to all parties and participants herein.
BACKGROUND TO THE HEARING OF THIS MOTION
6This joint motion was originally brought by the Commission and the Complainants, by way of a letter sent to the Tribunal from Commission counsel, dated May 13, 2003. Counsel for the Commission inquired about the outcome of this request in his second letter of August 25, 2003.
7No reply to this motion for a change of venue was received from the Respondents.
8During the pre-hearing conference call, the Tribunal asked the Respondents what their position was with respect to this motion. They consented to the request for a change of venue, and agreed with the Commission and Complainants that the balance of convenience favoured holding the hearing in Atikokan.
9At this time, the Tribunal also asked the Respondents why they have missed two previous deadlines set by the Tribunal for the delivery and filing of their pleadings, and for making disclosure, and for failing to respond to the Tribunal’s correspondence, directing same. Ms Gillies asked the Tribunal for a further indulgence, explaining that she has recently had surgery and has been “off for six weeks” because of it. Notwithstanding, the Respondents did not write to the Tribunal in advance asking for an extension.
DECISION
10The Commission’s motion to change the venue of this hearing is hereby granted. The Tribunal is satisfied based on evidence of all parties before it that the balance of convenience for all the parties, and for their eighteen witnesses, favours moving the hearing to Atikokan, Ontario.
11The Tribunal also grants the Respondents a further indulgence, on a peremptory basis, to serve and file their pleadings, and make full disclosure, no later than October 1, 2003. The Tribunal confirms that it advised the Respondents, during the pre-hearing conference call, that if they fail to file their pleadings and make full disclosure by October 1, 2003, that the Tribunal will require them to serve and file a formal, written notice of motion (which includes a sworn affidavit) setting out why such leave should be granted to them. The Tribunal further cautioned the Respondents that failure to file their pleadings and make full disclosure may seriously prejudice their ability to lead evidence in their case. They said they understood this and agreed to comply.
ORDER
12The Tribunal orders as follows:
(1) The venue for the hearing of these matters is hereby changed to Atikokan, Ontario, on the consent of all parties;
(2) The hearing is scheduled to take place on February 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, 2004, and February 16, 17 and 18, 2003, from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. each day, at a location in Atikokan to be directed by the Registrar forthwith; and
(3) The Respondents shall serve and file their Response and make full disclosure, including written will-say statements from their witnesses, to the other parties by October 1, 2003 on a peremptory basis.
Dated at Toronto this 22nd day of September, 2003.
“Mary Ross Hendriks”
Mary Ross Hendriks
Vice-Chair