Nacon Dioba v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Government Services, Office of the Registrar General, Judith Hartman, and Shelly Dolph, 2009 HRTO 651

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Nacon Dioba

Applicant

• and-

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Government Services, Office of the Registrar General, Judith Hartman, and Shelly Dolph

Respondents

INterim DECISION

Adjudicator: Michael Gottheil

Date: May 15, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 651

Indexed as: Dioba v. Ontario (Government Services)

1On May 12, 2009 the applicant filed a Request for Reconsideration of a Case Assessment Direction (CAD) issued in respect of this Application on May 11, 2009 .

2As I indicated in that CAD, the purpose of a Case Assessment Direction is to assist the parties in focusing on the relevant issues and ensure that applications will be dealt with fairly, expeditiously and on the true merits. It is a case-management tool which does not pre-determine the hearing but, rather, identifies important facts and issues that the parties will need to deal with in the hearing. The objective is to help the parties, particularly self-represented parties and/or parties who are unfamiliar with practice and procedure before this Tribunal, to understand what they will need to do in the hearing and avoid delays and adjournments. The CAD is not a final decision of the Tribunal.

3Rule 26.1 provides that a party “may request reconsideration of a final decision of the Tribunal”. As the CAD is not a final decision of the Tribunal the Request for Reconsideration is refused.

4The hearing will proceed on May 19, 2009. If any party fails to attend a scheduled hearing, the Tribunal may proceed in that party’s absence, and may proceed to determine the Application without further notice to that party.