Anna Fal v. Concept Storage Solutions Ltd., Peter Roell and Rosemary Sproviero, 2008 HRTO 250

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Anna Fal Applicant

-and-

Concept Storage Solutions Ltd., Peter Roell and Rosemary Sproviero Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Kaye Joachim Date: November 12, 2008 Citation: 2008 HRTO 250 Indexed as: Fal v. Concept Storage Solutions

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 / (toll free) 1-800-424-1168 E-mail hrto.registrar-transition@ontario.ca Website www.hrto.ca

1This is an application filed September 18, 2008 under section 53(3) of Part VI of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"). On September 14, 2008 the Tribunal scheduled a mediation for November 28, 2008. On October 22, 2008 the respondents filed their Response to the Application.

2On November 3, 2008, the respondents requested an adjournment and offered alternative dates in December 2008; however, the applicant was not available on those dates. The Tribunal offered alternative dates in January and February 2009. On November 7, 2008 the applicant wrote the Tribunal refusing to participate in a rescheduled mediation.

3The Tribunal's Rules of Procedure for Applications under Section 53(3) of the Human Rights Code (Section 53(3) Rules) and the Tribunal's Guide to Section 53(3) Applications, contemplate that the first step in a section 53(3) application is mediation. If mediation is unsuccessful, the mediator will assist the parties to complete a case management checklist (Rule 8) and the application proceeds to a case resolution conference in accordance with Rule 9.1.

4Where a party refuses to attend the mediation, it may impede the efficient processing of the application, in which case the Tribunal may, in its discretion, issue a case management direction (Rule 5.14) directing the parties to attend at the Tribunal to complete the matters identified in the case management checklist. In this case, however, I am satisfied the Application can be processed expeditiously without requiring such attendance.

5In the circumstances of this case, the mediation scheduled for November 28, 2008 is cancelled. The Tribunal will proceed to the next step in the process, which is to prepare for a case resolution conference in accordance with Rule 9.

6Accordingly, the parties are directed as follows:

a. Within 30 days following the date of this decision, the applicant shall deliver to the respondents and file with the Tribunal, a statement of any additional facts the applicant intends to rely upon and a description of the remedies sought. In addition, the applicant shall deliver to the respondents a copy of all arguably relevant documents in the applicant's possession, except where privilege is claimed.

b. Within 45 days following the date of this decision, the respondents shall deliver the applicant and file with the Tribunal a statement of any additional facts the respondents will rely upon and the respondents' position with respect to the requested remedies. In addition, the respondents must deliver to the applicant a copy of all arguably relevant documents in the respondents' possession, except where privilege is claimed.

7The Tribunal will contact the parties to set a date for the case resolution conference. The parties are reminded that the Section 53(3) Rules contemplate that applications under section 53(3) of the Code be dealt with in an expedited manner.