J.H. v. Lambton Kent District School Board, 2010 HRTO 1130

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

Between:

J. H. by his litigation guardian, Susan Ward

Applicant

-and-

Lambton Kent District School Board

Respondent

Interim Decision

Adjudicator: Mark Hart Date: May 19, 2010 Citation: 2010 HRTO 1130 Indexed as: J.H. v. Lambton Kent District School Board

1This is an Application made under s. 53(5) of the Ontario Human Rights Code, dated June 26, 2009. The underlying complaint was filed with the Ontario Human Rights Commission (the “Commission”) on December 28, 2005.

2The purpose of this Interim Decision is to address the respondent’s request for dismissal of the Application on the basis that there was no “continued complaint” against the respondent within the meaning of s. 53 of the Code as of June 30, 2008.

3The hearing in this matter is currently scheduled for May 26, 2010. The respondent’s Request for Order was filed on April 29, 2010 and the applicant’s Response was filed on May 13, 2010.

4The applicant appears originally to have filed his complaint against the respondent school board, the Lakeroad Lions Band and two personal respondents, which was identified by Commission file number SHEY-6KCMLE. Typically, once a complaint has formally been filed with the Commission, the Commission affixes a cover page to the complaint which identifies the parties and the grounds of discrimination alleged. The original cover page affixed to this complaint by the Commission was not included with the material filed with the Application and has not been filed with the Tribunal, so it is unclear precisely who was identified by the Commission as a respondent to the original complaint.

5At some point after the complaint was filed, it appears that the complaint was amended to change the name of the corporate respondent. The respondent has filed with the Tribunal a copy of a letter, dated October 19, 2006 from Alan Strojin to a representative for the Lakeroad Lions Band attaching an amended complaint and inviting a response to the amended complaint. The letter attaches the Commission cover page for an amended complaint bearing the same file number. However, the amended complaint names only the Lakeroad Lions Band and one individual as respondents.

6The applicant has provided a copy of a letter that his litigation guardian sent to the Commission, dated November 4, 2008, in which she registers her objection to the removal of the respondent school board and personal representatives of the board as parties to the complaint. This letter states “thank-you for ensuring that the Lambton County Board of Education be rightfully named as the first and foremost defendant in [the applicant’s] complaint”. It is unclear to me whether this refers to a request being made by the applicant to re-include the respondent school board as a party to the complaint, or whether this is truly an expression of gratitude for such action already having been taken by the Commission.

7Given the material filed by the parties to date, it is unclear to me whether, as of June 30, 2008, there was a continued complaint by the applicant against the respondent school board in the hands of the Commission. As a result, the Commission is directed by the Tribunal to review its records in this matter and advise the parties and the Tribunal whether there was a continued complaint by the applicant against the respondent school board outstanding at the Commission as of June 30, 2008. The Commission is directed to provide this information by no later than the end of the day on Friday, May 21, 2010.