HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Wanmin Tan
Applicant
-and-
HPG Limited, Scott Stacey and Mike Brown
Respondents
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Kaye Joachim
Indexed as: Tan v. HPG Limited
1A Case Resolution Conference (“hearing”) in this matter is scheduled for December 11, 2009. The hearing was scheduled by Notice from the Tribunal dated September 15, 2009. Although invited to confirm his availability for proposed dates, the applicant did not. The Tribunal left a message with applicant to contact the Tribunal and advised that hearing would be scheduled without his consent if he did not respond. He did not respond. The hearing was scheduled for December 11, 2009.
2The applicant did not file a statement of additional facts or remedy by the October deadline.
3On November 30, 2009, the applicant sent an email to the Tribunal stating “would you please to postpone the hearing meeting on December 11, 2009.” No reasons were expressed.
4While 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.
5The 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.
6In the absence of any explanation for the request, I must conclude that there are no exceptional circumstances that would permit an adjournment. The applicant has known since September 15, 2009 that the hearing was scheduled for December 11, 2009 and had the opportunity to request a rescheduling.
7The request for adjournment is denied.
Dated at Toronto, this 3rd day of December, 2009.
“Signed by”
Kaye Joachim
Alternate Chair