Elise Runions v. City of Brockville, 2009 HRTO 1668

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Elise Runions

Applicant

-and-

City of Brockville

Respondent

AND B E T W E E N:

Elise Runions

Applicant

-and-

Brockville Professional Firefighters Association

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Kaye Joachim

Date: October 13, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 1668

Indexed as: Runions v. Brockville (City)

1These Applications were filed in May 2009 under section 53(3) of Part VI of the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”). Mediation is scheduled for October 22, 2009. The purpose of this Interim Decision is to address the applicant’s request to add a parties and for further particulars from the respondent, Brockville Professional Firefighters Association (“BPFFA”).

2The applicant seeks to add Craig Mason, president of the BPFFA. Although Mr. Mason was listed as a person being complained about in the original complaint filed with the Ontario Human Rights Commission, he was not named by the Commission as a respondent on the first page of the complaint form.

3The Tribunal has held that the following will be considered in deciding a request to add a respondent: where alleged facts, if proven, could lead to a finding that the proposed respondent infringed the applicant’s rights under the Code; the proposed respondent would not suffer real and substantial prejudice if added as a party to the proceeding; and if it would be fair, in all the circumstances to add the proposed respondent: Smyth v Toronto Police Services Board, 2009 HRTO 1513.

4The applicable provision of the new Code relating to parties is section 36:

The parties to an application under section 34 or 35 are the following:

1. In the case of an application under subsection 34 (1), the person who made the application.

2. In the case of an application under subsection 34 (5), the person on behalf of whom the application is made.

3. In the case of an application under section 35, the Commission.

4. Any person against whom an order is sought in the application.

5. Any other person or the Commission, if they are added as a party by the Tribunal.

5Under s. 36(5), the Tribunal continues to have a broad discretion to add parties to an application.

6In this case, I decline to exercise my discretion to add Craig Mason as a respondent to this Application. His actions bind the BPFFA and are not of such a nature that it would be likely that he would be held personally liable for a breach of the Code.

7With respect to the request for further particulars from the BPFFA, this request is premature. If mediation does not resolve the issues between the parties, the Tribunal Rules provide for the parties to file statements of additional facts. The Tribunal will not order further particulars at this stage.