Tony Yandernoll v. Murray Brothers Lumber Company and Tom Serran, 2009 HRTO 312

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Tony Yandernoll

Applicant

-and-

Murray Brothers Lumber Company and Tom Serran

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Alan Whyte

Date: March 17, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 312

Indexed as: Yandernoll v. Murray Brothers Lumber

1This is an Application filed on November 10, 2008 under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended (the “Code”), which alleges discrimination in employment on the basis of disability and reprisal.

2A Request to Expedite Proceedings was filed with the Application, based on the applicant’s dire financial circumstances and the financial harm to him and his family that may ensue if the Application is not expedited.

3Rule 21.1 provides that an applicant may request “that the Tribunal deal with an Application on an expedited basis in circumstances which require an urgent resolution of the issues in dispute”. Rule 21.2 requires that a request to expedite proceedings describe urgent circumstances that may affect the fair and just resolution of the merits of the Application and the harm that would result if the request is denied. Further, in Weerawardane v. 2152458 Ontario Ltd., 2008 HRTO 53, the Tribunal held as follows, at paragraph 9:

For a request to expedite to be granted, the applicant must demonstrate that the circumstances are truly urgent, requiring the resolution of the human rights dispute in a particularly rapid manner as compared with the time required to complete the Tribunal’s regular process.

4The respondents, in their Response to Request to Expedite Proceedings, submit that there are no urgent circumstances that may affect the fair and just resolution of the merits of the Application. It is pointed out that the documentary evidence will not deteriorate during the normal timeframe of the proceeding, the witnesses are in good health and will be available to provide evidence in the normal course and there is no imminent threat of bankruptcy of the corporate respondent. It is further submitted that the matter is potentially complex and that the normal amount of time should be provided to the respondents to prepare their defence to the Application.

5In the Tribunal's view, the applicant has not met his burden of showing any urgent circumstances that may affect the fair and just resolution of the merits of the Application, nor has he outlined sufficient harm that would flow if the request was denied. The circumstances are not so particularly urgent as to distinguish this Application from other cases before the Tribunal. The Request to Expedite is denied.

6I am not seized of this matter.