Iqbal v. Inscape Corporation, 2009 HRTO 934

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

BETWEEN:

Saeed Iqbal Applicant

-and-

Inscape Corporation Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: David A. Wright Date: June 29, 2009 Citation: 2009 HRTO 934 Indexed as: Iqbal v. Inscape Corporation

1This is an Application filed under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended. The Tribunal sent the parties a "Confirmation of Hearing" notice on May 7, 2009 scheduling the hearing for July 31, 2009. The letter stated that requests for adjournments would be dealt with according to the Tribunal's Information Bulletin: Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests, and Requests for Adjournments.

2On June 15, 2009, counsel for the respondent sent the Tribunal a letter stating that "several of the key witnesses for the respondent had previously planned vacations on July 31, 2009. It would cause them considerable personal hardship and expense in order to cancel their vacation plans." He requested that the hearing be rescheduled.

3The Tribunal's Information Bulletin on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests, and Requests for Adjournments provides that requests to reschedule must be made within five days of receiving the Notice of Hearing. The Information Bulletin states the following regarding requests for adjournment:

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 alternative dates for the rescheduling of the mediation or hearing. Alternative 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.

4In Vallentyne v. Royal Canadian Legion, 2009 HRTO 660 at para. 4, the Tribunal stated as follows:

The Tribunal is committed to the fair, just and expeditious resolution of proceedings before it. It expects to receive thousands of applications each year. The Tribunal has a responsibility to ensure that public resources are used effectively to meet the demands of all parties before the Tribunal. Therefore, when an adjournment request is made, it is not only the interests of the parties to the particular proceeding must consider, but the fact that Tribunal time reserved for the resolution of those parties' dispute will no longer be used. For that reason, among others, the Tribunal's Information Bulletin on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests and Requests for Adjournments indicates that even adjournment requests made on consent of the parties more than five days after the hearing is scheduled may be denied. The Tribunal has balanced the interests of parties in having hearings scheduled according to their and counsel's availability with these broader interests by requiring that a party advise within five days that they are unavailable, and providing that requests for adjournment will not otherwise be granted, absent exceptional circumstances.

5Witness vacations do not amount to extraordinary or exceptional circumstances that justify the rescheduling of the hearing at this stage, over a month after it was scheduled. Accordingly, the request that the hearing be rescheduled is denied.

6Counsel for the respondent is requested to immediately advise which witnesses are unavailable and the Tribunal will consider whether the proceeding can be structured so that other witnesses are heard on that date. A Case Assessment Direction will follow shortly.

7I am not seized.