Abdalla v. Toronto District School Board, 2009 HRTO 243

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Roda Abdalla

Applicant

-and-

Toronto District School Board (City Adult Learning Centre), Lam Hazel, Shuman Cheung and Margaret Smyth

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: David Muir Date: March 4, 2009 Citation: 2009 HRTO 243 Indexed as: Abdalla v. Toronto District School Board

1This is an Application filed September 24, 2008 under section 53(3) of Part VI of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”).

2This Interim Decision provides reasons for the denial of an adjournment of the Case Resolution Conference scheduled for March 10 and 11, 2009. This date was selected after consultation with the parties. The decision to deny the adjournment was communicated to the parties by letter dated March 2, 2009.

3The applicant has indicated that she has retained a representative who is not available on the second scheduled day, March 11, 2009. The respondents object to the adjournment on the basis that the applicant has had two years to retain a representative and has had ample opportunity to retain a representative available on both Case Resolution Conference dates.

4The Tribunal is committed to the fair, just and expeditious resolution of the merits of all transitional applications under section 53(3) and 53(5) and its transitional processes are designed for timely resolution of all applications.

5The applicant has not delivered and filed a list of witnesses. No documents have been delivered and filed. The allegations in the complaint are limited. It is not clear at all that the Case Resolution Conference will take more than a day to complete. The parties were canvassed for their availability for a Case Resolution Conference at mediation on November 26, 2008. The applicant indicated she was available anytime in March 2009. The parties were notified of the dates for the Case Resolution Conference by Registrar’s letter dated January 12, 2009. The request for an adjournment was made on February 27, 2009.

6In the circumstances, the request for an adjournment is denied. This decision does not fetter the discretion of the Vice-Chair presiding at the Case Resolution Conference to make appropriate Orders.