Martinez v. Peel Police Services Board, 2008 HRTO 434

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Elizabeth Martinez

Applicant

-and-

The Regional Municipality of Peel Police Services Board

Respondent

INTERIM decision

Adjudicator: Ena Chadha Date: December 29, 2008 Citation: 2008 HRTO 434 Indexed as: Martinez v. Peel Police Services Board

1This is an Application filed under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"), alleging discrimination in services on the basis of race, colour, ethnic origin and age.

2The respondent seeks an order deferring this Application on the basis that the subject matter of the Application is also the subject of criminal court proceedings.

3On November 14, 2008, the Tribunal issued an Interim Decision directing the parties to file submissions with respect to the preliminary issue of deferral. No submissions were received from the applicant. The respondent now asks the Tribunal to determine its request for deferral.

4Section 45 of the Code confirms the Tribunal's authority to defer consideration of an application.

5In considering whether to defer an application the Tribunal looks at the subject matter of the other proceeding; the nature of the other proceeding; the types of remedies available in the other proceeding; and whether it would be fair overall to the parties to defer, having regard to the status of each proceeding and the steps that have been taken to pursue them, see Lipke v. Ontario, 2008 HRTO 285, Calabria v. DTZ Barnicke, 2008 HRTO 411 and Baghdasserians v. 674469 Ontario, 2008 HRTO 404. As stated in these cases, deferral of an application avoids concurrent proceedings and the possibility of inconsistent findings of facts or law. However, as noted in Calabria, supra, and Baghdasserians, supra, deferral is not automatically indicated simply because the parties or facts underlying the Application are also involved in the other proceeding.

6Based on the information provided by the parties, while it appears that the criminal proceeding involves the same events that underlie the subject matter of this Application, there is no indication that the criminal proceeding involves the same parties, or will address the human rights allegations and issues. Further, criminal proceedings deal with different legal issues and do not provide for human rights remedies. No updated information has been provided as to the current status of the criminal proceeding.

7As such, in these circumstances, deferral is not appropriate. The Tribunal denies the respondent's request for deferral.

8I am not seized of this matter.