HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Carl Smith

Applicant

-and-

Ford Motor Company of Canada, Limited

Respondent

AND B E T W E E N:

Carl Smith

Applicant

-and-

CAW-Canada Local 200, Pat Donally, Tim Little and Tom Cochois

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Kaye Joachim

Date: September 28, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 1569

Indexed as: Smith v. Ford Motor

[1] A Case Resolution Conference (“hearing”) in this matter is scheduled for October 7 and 8, 2009. The hearing was scheduled by Notice from the Tribunal dated April 27, 2009. This Interim Decision addresses the request for an adjournment by the respondents in T-0516-08 (the “Union Application”).

[2] The Union respondents wrote to the Tribunal on September 22, 2009 advising that it had recently come to their attention that two of their witnesses are not available due to a previously scheduled union conference. The applicant opposed the adjournment request.

[3] While the Tribunal’s Information Bulletin on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests and Requests for Adjournments does not specifically apply to Transition Applications, nonetheless the principles set out in this Information Bulletin are equally applicable to Transition Applications.

[4] The Tribunal’s Information Bulletin provides that requests to reschedule must be made within five (5) days of receiving the Confirmation of Hearing and that thereafter, adjournments will be granted only in extraordinary circumstances. The Information Bulletin states the following regarding requests for adjournments:

Requests for adjournment, particularly last minute requests for adjournments are a significant impediment to fair and timely access to justice.

The Tribunal’s approach to scheduling and rescheduling mediations and hearings is designed to give the parties a fair opportunity to find suitable dates. Therefore, the Tribunal discourages adjournment requests, and will only grant adjournments in extraordinary circumstances such as illness of a party, witness or representative.

The Tribunal will not automatically grant adjournments even when all parties consent. Consent of all parties will be a factor which the Tribunal will consider where a request to adjourn a mediation or hearing is made, but it is not the only, or even the main factor.

Where a party seeks to adjourn a previously scheduled mediation or hearing, they must contact the Registrar as soon as the need arises. If practical, they should contact the other parties to seek their consent, and to discuss alternate dates for the rescheduling of the mediation or hearing. Alternate dates for mediation must fall within five (5) months of the date of the Notice of Application. Alternative dates for a hearing must fall within five (5) months of the date of the Confirmation of Hearing.

The party making the request should contact the Registrar and provide the reason for the request and the alternative agreed upon dates. Where the request is on short notice, the party must contact the Registrar by telephone or email.

The Tribunal typically will not adjourn a hearing date because the parties wish to “engage in settlement discussions” or are “close to a deal”. The Tribunal encourages mediation and settlements, and will assist the parties in this regard. Where parties believe they may be able to resolve a matter shortly before the scheduled hearing, they should advise the Registrar and the Tribunal will make a mediator and mediation room available. However, the Tribunal discourages the cancellation or adjournment of hearing dates so that the parties can explore settlement.

[5] The reasons for the Request do not constitute exceptional circumstances that would permit an adjournment. The Union respondents have known since April 2009 that the hearing was scheduled in October 2009 and had the opportunity to request a rescheduling. It is inevitable that the scheduling of hearing days will create some degree of conflict with work conferences in many cases. This is simply part of the adjudication process and does not constitute the kind of exceptional circumstances that would warrant granting an adjournment request of this nature.

[6] The request for adjournment is denied.

Dated at Toronto, this 28^th^ day of September, 2009.

“Signed by”

Kaye Joachim

Alternate Chair