Wayne Smith v. Ontario Provincial Police, 2008 HRTO 108

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Wayne Smith

Applicant

-and-

Ontario Provincial Police

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Mary Truemner

Date: September 29, 2008

Citation: 2008 HRTO 108

Indexed as: Smith v. Ontario Provincial Police

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario 655 Bay Street, 14th Floor Toronto ON M7A 2A3 Phone (416) 326-1312 / 1-866-598-0322 / Fax (416) 326-2199 / Toll Free1-866-355-6099 TTY (416) 314-2379 / 1-800-424-1168 E-mail hrto.registrar@ontario.ca Website www.hrto.ca

Background

1The applicant filed an application with the Tribunal on July 9, 2008 under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended, (the "Code"). The respondent's response was filed on time but is not complete. In the response, the respondent submitted:

We reserve the right to respond to the allegations pending the decision regarding the Respondents' Request for Early Dismissal and the Respondents' Request to Defer as outlined above and in the supporting documents.

2The respondent did not provide a summary of the facts and issues as required in question 9, nor did the respondent provide a list of documents.

3The respondent filed a Request for an Order during Proceedings seeking early dismissal, deferral and additional particulars as follows:

a. mediation at the Workers Safety and Insurance Board ("WSIB") has appropriately dealt with the substance of the application and therefore it should be dismissed pursuant to s.45.1 of the Code;

b. the applicant has an ongoing Workplace Discrimination and Harassment complaint before the Professional Standards Bureau of the Ontario Provincial Police which addresses the same issues raised in the application and therefore the application should be deferred; and

c. the additional particulars being sought were not specified, although the respondent requested specificity about the timing of alleged events.

4The applicant replied and objected to the respondent's request to reserve the right to introduce evidence at a later date on the basis that the respondent has "all known documents now," and is merely attempting to delay the process.

Analysis

5While the respondent has provided substantial narrative in its response to some questions in the response, and attached several documents, the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure require a respondent to file a complete response except in the extraordinary circumstances described in Rule 8.2. Those circumstances do not apply here. The filing of a complete response will assist the parties in understanding the nature of the issues, and enable the Tribunal to make decisions on how to proceed with the application with a view to facilitating its fair, just and expeditious resolution.

6Further, the request for particulars is premature. On review of the material before me, including the information provided in the response, I find that the respondent is sufficiently aware of the matters that form the basis of the applicant's allegations to file a response that meets the requirements of the Tribunal's Rules.

7The respondent is directed to file a complete response within 20 days of this decision. The applicant may file a further reply, if he wishes, dealing only with new matters raised in the complete response, not later than 14 days after receipt of the further response.

8The Registrar is directed to schedule a mediation date.

9I am not seized of this matter.