Michael Christianson v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, 2008 HRTO 91

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Michael Christianson

Applicant

-and-

College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Brian Eyolfson

Date: September 19, 2008

Citation: 2008 HRTO 91

Indexed as: Christianson v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario

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

wRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BY

Michael Christianson, Applicant ) On His Own Behalf

1The applicant filed an Application on August 27, 2008, 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 the area of goods, services and facilities on the basis of disability. The applicant also filed a request to expedite proceedings (Form 14), pursuant to Rule 21 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure for Applications under Part IV of the Code (“the Rules”). The respondent did not respond to the request to expedite.

2Rule 21.1 provides that an applicant may request “that the Tribunal deal with an Application on an expedited basis in circumstances which require an urgent resolution of the issues in dispute”. Rule 21.2 and Form 14 require that a request to expedite proceedings describe urgent circumstances that may affect the fair and just resolution of the merits of the application and the harm that would result if the request is denied. Further, in Weerawardane v. 2152458 Ontario Ltd., 2008 HRTO 53, the Tribunal held as follows, at paragraph 9:

For a request to expedite to be granted, the applicant must demonstrate that the circumstances are truly urgent, requiring the resolution of the human rights dispute in a particularly rapid manner as compared with the time required to complete the Tribunal’s regular process.

3Having reviewed the materials filed, and in light of the Tribunal’s Rules and the decision in Weerawardane referred to above, the request to expedite is denied. The circumstances are not so particularly urgent as to distinguish this Application from other cases before the Tribunal. I am not seized of this matter.