HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Terence Romanchook

Applicant

-and-

Garda Ontario and Greg Burian

Respondents

AND B E T W E E N:

Terence Romanchook

Applicant

-and-

Windsor Regional Hospital and Teri Renaud

Respondents

AND B E T W E E N:

Terence Romanchook

Applicant

-and-

Windsor Regional Hospital, David Musyj, Betty Gulak and Iris McGuire

Respondents

AND B E T W E E N:

R.J. Potomski

Applicant

-and-

Garda Ontario and Greg Burian

Respondents

AND B E T W E E N:

R.J. Potomski

Applicant

-and-

Windsor Regional Hospital, Garda Ontario, Greg Burian, Sarah Lorenz, David Musyj, Teri Renaud and

Barry Ewing

Respondents

AND B E T W E E N:

R.J. Potomski

Applicant

-and-

Windsor Regional Hospital, Garda Ontario, Greg Burian, Sarah Lorenz, Peter Scislowski, David Musyj and Teri Renaud

Respondents

AND B E T W E E N:

Terence Romanchook

Applicant

-and-

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care,

Erie St. Clair Community Care Access Centre and Windsor Regional Hospital

Respondents

AND B E T W E E N:

Terence Romanchook

Applicant

-and-

Windsor Regional Hospital and Hsien-Cheng (Wallace) Liang

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: David A. Wright

Date: December 3, 2008

2008-00139-I; 2008-00231-I 2008-00532-I

Citation: 2008 HRTO 349

Indexed as: Romanchook v. Garda Ontario

1Following the recent Interim Decision in this matter, Romanchook v. Garda Ontario, 2008 HRTO 313, counsel for Windsor Regional Hospital sought clarification of what the decision permitted the Hospital to file by way of further Response in File No. 2008-00808-I. She also requested an extension to December 31, 2008 for the Response. This decision provides that clarification and grants the requested extension.

2In the November 12, 2008 materials filed on behalf of the applicant in response to the Tribunal’s previous Interim Decision, Romanchook v. Garda Ontario, 2008 HRTO 313, various allegations were made against Windsor Regional Hospital in support of the argument that the Tribunal had jurisdiction to deal with the Application against it. Since the November 12, 2008 materials made new allegations not contained in the Application, the Hospital shall have an opportunity to file a further Response. This further Response may set out any further material facts or arguments upon which the Hospital wishes to rely at the hearing of Application 2008-00808-I. It need not file this pleading on a particular Tribunal form but may do so in the form of correspondence addressed to the Registrar. This shall be considered part of the Hospital’s Response. The Hospital is granted until December 31, 2008 to file its further Response.

3The deadline for the parties to make submissions on whether Applications 2008-00808-I, 2008-00103-I, 2008-00105-I, 2008-00106-I, 2008-00107-I, 2008-00109-I, 2008-00139-I and 2008-00532-I should be heard together has not been extended and remains December 11, 2008.