HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Jemila Macanovic
Complainant
-and-
Ontario Human Rights Commission
Commission
-and-
Toronto Police Services Board
Respondent
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Sherry Liang
Indexed as: Macanovic v. Toronto (Police Services Board)
Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario 655 Bay Street, 14th Floor Toronto ON M7A 2A3 Phone (416) 314-8419 Fax (416) 314-8743 Toll free 1-866-598-0322 TTY (416) 314-2379 / 1-800-424-1168 E-mail hrto.registrar-transition@ontario.ca Website www.hrto.ca
APPEARANCES
Jemila Macanovic, Complainant ) On Her Own Behalf
Toronto Police Services Board, Respondent ) Robert J. Baldwin, Counsel
Ontario Human Rights Commission ) Sharon Abrahams, Counsel
1In this complaint made under the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended (the “Code”), all parties have raised preliminary issues that they wish the Tribunal to decide before the hearing. At a Pre-Hearing Conference Call held on October 31, 2008, the parties made submissions on the appropriate procedure and order in which to deal with those issues.
2The Commission and the complainant have made requests for further disclosure of documents from the respondent. The respondent has made a request for further particulars regarding the allegations raised by the Commission and the complainant, as well as a request to strike certain paragraphs of the pleadings.
3The respondent submitted that the Tribunal ought to hear and determine its requests before determining the disclosure requests. The Commission and the complainant submitted that the Tribunal ought to hear and determine the production requests prior to deciding the respondent’s requests.
4The Tribunal has determined that it will schedule a half-day hearing to hear the parties’ submissions on all the requests. The purpose of the hearing is to hear the parties’ submissions on the following issues:
The Commission and the complainant’s requests for further production of documents from the respondent and/or the Chief of Police.
The respondent’s request for further particulars of certain allegations in the pleadings.
The respondent’s request to strike out certain portions of the pleadings, on the basis that they raise issues that form the basis of other complaints with the Commission, are not within the scope of the original complaint, or are insufficiently particularized. In this regard, the Tribunal will consider the request by the complainant to have all her complaints against the respondent heard together as part of the current complaint.
The order in which the Tribunal ought to determine the above issues.
5The parties have, through their pleadings, identified the issues sufficiently that the Tribunal does not require Requests for Orders to be filed. However, the Tribunal will direct each party to respond to the requests made by the others, as well as provide further information that will be helpful to the Tribunal in considering these issues. The Tribunal provides the following directions:
The complainant will, by November 17, 2008, confirm in writing the documents she wishes the respondent to produce, to the extent that they are in addition to those listed on the final page of the Commission’s pleadings.
At the same time, the Commission and the complainant will provide copies of any other existing complaints under the Code made by the complainant against the respondent, and arising out of any of the events described in the pleadings, as well as any responses in relation to those complaints. The Commission and the complainant will also provide information about the current status of those complaints.
The respondent will, by December 1, 2008, provide its position with respect to the further production requested by the Commission and complainant, and the reasons for its position (with reference to the list of documents in the Commission’s pleadings and the additional list provided by the complainant).
The Commission and the complainant will, by December 15, 2008, provide their positions in response to the requests for particulars and the requests to strike out parts of the pleadings, and the reasons for their positions.
6All material ordered above must be delivered to the other parties and filed with the Tribunal.
7Amongst the documents sought by the complainant are audio recordings and police officers’ notes in relation to the incident on or about December 16, 2003. Without prejudice to the position of the respondent that the allegations about this matter should be struck from the pleadings, the respondent has agreed to make inquiries about whether such documents still exist. The respondent’s response on this should be included with the material ordered above.
8The respondent states that at least some of the documents requested by the Commission and the complainant are in the custody or control of the Chief of Police. The respondent is directed to send a copy of this decision to the Chief of Police, as well as copies of the correspondence setting out the substance of the Commission and complainant’s requests for documents. If the Chief of Police wishes to make submissions in response to the request for documents, he is directed to provide his position in writing in the same manner directed above to the respondent, by December 1, 2008, and indicate whether he wishes to make submissions in person at the oral hearing.
9The Registrar-Transition will contact the parties to determine their availability for a half-day hearing to occur no earlier than January 5, 2009.
Dated at Toronto, this 3rd day of November, 2008.
“Signed by”
Sherry Liang
Vice-Chair