HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Arthur Andersen Applicant
-and-
Wheel Chair Accessible Transit Inc. Respondent
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Alison Renton Date: May 31, 2010 Citation: 2010 HRTO 1200 Indexed as: Andersen v. Wheel Chair Accessible Transit
1The applicant filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c.H.19 as amended (the "Code"), on January 6, 2010 alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of age when he was terminated in February 2009.
2The respondent filed a Response on March 25, 2010 asking for an early dismissal of the Application on the basis that the applicant has signed a full and final release in respect of the subject matter of the Application. The respondent submitted that the applicant had commenced a small claims court action against it pertaining to his termination, which resulted in minutes of settlement being entered into between the parties dated October 7, 2009 ("the minutes"). The respondent provided the Tribunal with a copy of the minutes that appear on a Superior Court of Justice, Toronto Small Claims Court form. Subsequent to the minutes, in March 2010, the applicant commenced another civil action against the respondent in small claim court for allegedly falsely accusing the applicant of being in an accident. The respondent submits that the second civil action is barred by the minutes and that the applicant is a vexatious litigant.
3The applicant filed a Response to a RFOP responding to the respondent's request for an early dismissal of the Application. He denies that he is a vexatious litigant and provides justification for the legal proceedings he has commenced against the respondent. He opposes the respondent's RFOP because, he asserts, the respondent is misleading the Tribunal with wrong information.
4Section 34(11) of the Code provides:
A person who believes that one of his or her rights under Part I have been infringed may not make an application under subsection (1) with respect to that right if,
(b) a court has finally determined the issue of whether the right has been infringed or the matter has been settled.
5Section 45.1 of the Code provides:
The Tribunal may dismiss an application, in whole or in part, in accordance with its rules if the Tribunal is of the opinion that another proceeding has appropriately dealt with the substance of the Application.
6Section 43(2) of the Code provides that the Tribunal shall not finally dispose of an Application without affording the parties an opportunity to make oral submissions. Accordingly, the Registrar will schedule a half day hearing to consider whether the Application should be dismissed as a result of the minutes and/or because of the small claims court proceedings.
7The Tribunal directs the parties to provide an update about the second small claims court action that was filed. If, for the purposes of the hearing, either party wishes to rely on any additional written materials (including written submissions, documents or case law) or facts not already before the Tribunal, they must deliver such additional material to the other party and file it with the Registrar within 21 days of the date of this Interim Decision. The Tribunal's decisions are found at www.CanLII.org. Following the conference call hearing, the Tribunal will determine whether there is a basis to proceed with the Application, and may make further directions.
8I am not seized of this matter.
Dated at Toronto, this 31^st^ day of May, 2010.
"Signed By"
__________________________________
Alison Renton Vice-chair