HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Keyvan Nourhaghighi
Applicant
-and-
Toronto Catholic District School Board, COSTI Corvetti Centre, COSTI Board, City of Toronto, United Way of Greater Toronto, Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario as Represented by the Attorney General,
and eight individual respondents
Respondents
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Sherry Liang
Indexed as: Nourhaghighi v. Toronto Catholic District School Board
APPEARANCES:
Keyvan Nourhaghighi, Applicant ) On his own behalf
Toronto Catholic District School Board ) Amy R. Tibble, Counsel and six individual respondents )
COSTI Corvetti Centre, COSTI Board ) Marnie Baizley, Counsel and two individual respondents ) (observer)
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario ) Vanessa Glasser, student at law as represented by the Attorney General ) (observer)
1This is an Application filed on December 11, 2008, under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”). A hearing has been scheduled for October 28, 2009, to deal with a number of preliminary issues raised by the respondents, including whether the Application may proceed in light of a Court Order finding the applicant a vexatious litigant under the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43 as amended. Some of the respondents ask that the Application be dismissed on the basis that it is, among other things, vexatious, abusive and made in bad faith. Parts of the Application are said to be defamatory and offensive. As well, a number of respondents seek to be removed from the proceedings.
2On August 20, 2009, the Toronto Catholic District School Board and certain individual respondents (collectively referred to here as the “Board respondents”) filed a Request for Order, seeking the following orders from the Tribunal:
An order that the applicant be prohibited from posting and otherwise disseminating information related to these proceedings
An order requiring the applicant to remove all posted materials from the internet or other media forthwith and to refrain from making such postings in the future.
3The grounds for the Request arise out of material that the applicant is alleged to have posted on the internet. The Board respondents state that the postings go well beyond the boundaries of what is acceptable in this proceeding and describe them as