Thorne v. Canadian Hospitality Security Alliance, 2009 HRTO 1105

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

Between:

Stephen Thorne Applicant

-and-

Canadian Hospitality Security Alliance Inc. Respondent

Interim Decision

Adjudicator: David A. Wright Date: July 22, 2009 Citation: 2009 HRTO 1105 Indexed as: Thorne v. Canadian Hospitality Security Alliance

1This Application filed on March 5, 2009 alleges discrimination in employment contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"). On July 20, 2009, the applicant filed a Request to Expedite the Application, citing "interest charges that have been charged to me and I will be able to apply for my tax return". When asked to describe the harm if the request is denied, he notes, "I will have extra fees and interest charged on my Revenue Canada Account as well as the possible loss of my home".

2The Tribunal's Rules of Procedure provide for applications to be dealt with in an expedited manner in urgent circumstances. Rule 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 requires an applicant seeking an expedited application to identify any 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.

3In Weerawardane v. 2152458 Ontario Ltd., 2008 HRTO 53, at para. 9 the Tribunal held that, 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.

4In accordance with Rules 5.2 and 21.3 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure, the Tribunal does not require a Response to Request to Expedite from the respondent. Having reviewed the applicant's materials, this Request to Expedite does not meet the high threshold required by the Tribunal's jurisprudence. In particular, the financial pressures and circumstances the applicant describes do not warrant giving this Application priority for Tribunal resources over other matters. The Request to Expedite is denied.

5From a review of the material in the file, it appears to the Tribunal that there is an issue about whether this Application is within its jurisdiction. The applicant marked "record of offences" as the alleged ground of discrimination in his Application form. On the Form 1-A, which asks specific questions about employment discrimination, the applicant answered "no" to the questions "Do you believe you were discriminated against because of your record of offences under a federal law (Criminal Code offence)?" and "Do you believe you were harassed or discriminated against because of your record of offences under provincial law (such as the Highway Traffic Act)?".

6The Tribunal does not have a general power to evaluate employment relationships, but hears applications that allege violations of the Code. In employment, s. 5(1) of the Code prohibits discrimination because of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, record of offences, marital status, family status or disability. Section 10(1) defines record of offences as a conviction for:

(a) An offence in respect of which a pardon has been granted under the Criminal Records Act (Canada) and has not been revoked; or

(b) An offence in respect of any provincial enactment.

7The applicant states that he does not believe he was harassed or discriminated against as a result of a conviction for either offence, and therefore the Application does not, in fact, allege discrimination on the basis of record of offences as defined in the Code. The applicant has identified no other alleged ground of discrimination or basis upon which he says that the Code was violated.

8The Tribunal requests written submissions from the applicant to address the issue of its jurisdiction to hear the Application. The applicant should explain how his Application raises matters which the Tribunal has the power to decide. The respondent is not required to file any submissions on this point unless directed to do so by the Tribunal.

9The applicant's submissions should be delivered to the respondent and filed with the Tribunal by August 12, 2009. Following receipt of the submissions, or if the applicant does not provide submissions by the date set, the Tribunal may consider whether the Application should be dismissed under Rule 13 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure, which permits it to dismiss all or part of an application that is outside its jurisdiction.

10I am not seized of this matter.