Ontario Human Rights Commission v. General Motors Defence, 2006 HRTO 35

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Ontario Human Rights Commission

Commission

-and-

Thomas Sinclair, Roland Craig, Barry Fawcett, Donald Coubrough, Lloyd Gordon and Elie Faysal

Complainants

-and-

General Motors Defence, a division of General Motors of Canada Limited

Respondent

Interim DECISION

Adjudicator: Ian Anderson

Date: December 12, 2006

Citation: 2006 HRTO 35

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario 400 University Avenue, 7^th 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 E-mail hrto.registrar@jus.gov.on.ca Website www.hrto.ca

1By letter dated December 4, 2006, the Attorney General of Ontario indicated an intention to intervene with respect to the issues raised by the Notice of Constitutional Question delivered by General Motors Defence in relation to these proceedings and advised that it intended to deliver its written argument by approximately December 18, 2006. By letter dated December 7, 2006, General Motors Defence objected to the intervention of the Attorney General of Ontario at this juncture and asserted that it would be prejudiced by the late filing of written argument by the Attorney General of Ontario in view of the fact that the constitutional question is scheduled to be heard on January 9 and 10, 2007. By letter dated December 11, 2006, the Attorney General of Ontario took the position that it was entitled to intervene in these proceedings as of right pursuant to section 109 of the Courts of Justice Act, and, while not conceding that General Motors Defence was prejudiced, indicated that it would not oppose an adjournment request.

2Any party taking the position that the Attorney General of Ontario is not entitled to intervene in these proceedings at this juncture, or taking the position that if the Attorney General of Ontario is permitted to intervene the hearings scheduled for January 9 and 10, 2007 should be adjourned, shall file full written submissions in support of its position no later than 12:00 p.m., December 18, 2006. The other parties need not file any submission in reply until and unless directed to do so by the Tribunal. The Tribunal will consider the question of intervention and adjournment based on submissions filed.