John Tewogbade v. Toronto Police Services Board and Mike Earl, 2009 HRTO 1441

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

John Tewogbade

Applicant

-and-

Toronto Police Services Board and Mike Earl

Respondents

-and-

Toronto Police Association

Intervenor

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Kaye Joachim Date: September 10, 2009 Citation: 2009 HRTO 1441 Indexed as: Tewogbade v. Toronto Police Services Board

1This is an Application filed January 7, 2009 under section 53(5) of Part VI of the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, (the “Code”).

2The purpose of this Interim Decision is to address the request by the respondents for dismissal on the basis of abuse of process and lack of jurisdiction and the applicant’s request for production of documents.

3The applicant filed a complaint with the Ontario Human Rights Commission on May 6, 2005 alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of race, colour, ethnic origin and disability. The applicant self-identifies as an African Canadian male with an addiction to marijuana.

4Following his arrest for various offences under the Criminal Code, the applicant resigned his employment as a police officer and arranged a plea bargain of the outstanding criminal charges.

5The applicant alleges that his forced resignation constitutes discrimination on intersecting grounds of disability and race.

6The respondents filed a Request for Order during Proceedings seeking dismissal of the Application on the basis that the applicant has not demonstrated a prima facie case and that his challenge to his resignation and plea bargain amount to an abuse of process. In my view, these are preliminary issues which should be addressed prior to the hearing on the merits.

7The applicant alleges that he signed the application under duress as a result of pressure brought about by the employer’s failure to accommodate and pressure brought upon him as a Black officer to resign. In my view, I may need to hear evidence about the alleged duress in order to determine the employer’s preliminary objections.

8Accordingly, the Registrar-Transition will contact the parties to schedule a Case Resolution Conference to hear evidence and argument with respect to the respondents’ request for early dismissal. In particular, I would like to hear the evidence of the applicant relating to the alleged duress leading up to the resignation and plea bargain. To clarify, I will not need to hear evidence about the respondent’s alleged reasons for offering the resignation/plea bargain deal at this stage.

9The applicant has filed a Request for Order during Proceedings requesting production. In my view, the only documents required to be produced at this stage should relate solely to the respondents’ preliminary objection and the applicant’s asserted resignation and plea bargain under duress.

10The parties shall be given an opportunity to refine their submissions for production in light of this ruling. The applicant is directed to file a revised list of production required for the preliminary issues within 10 days of receipt of this Interim Decision. The respondents and intervenor are directed to file a revised Response within 10 days of receipt of the applicant’s revised production request.

11The Tribunal will issue further directions as required.

12I am not seized.