HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Richard Burns
Applicant
-and-
Thunder Bay Police Service Board and Robert Herman
Respondents
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Mark Hart
Indexed as: Burns v. Thunder Bay Police Service Board
1A preliminary hearing in these matters is scheduled to proceed in Thunder Bay on Tuesday, August 31, 2010. This Interim Decision addresses the applicant’s request for an adjournment, which is opposed by the respondents.
2By fax dated August 13, 2010, the applicant sought an adjournment of the preliminary hearing until a ruling by this Tribunal was made on a request for intervenor status by the Ontario Human Rights Commission (“Commission”). The applicant states that the Commission has been formally requested to obtain intervenor status in this matter, as the systemic nature of the complaint and its clear public interest falls within the Commission’s mandate for intervenor status.
3On August 16, 2010, the Tribunal wrote to the parties to request the respondents’ position on the adjournment request. In response, on August 17, 2010, the respondents provided detailed written submissions setting out the history of this matter and objecting to the adjournment request. The applicant filed reply submissions by fax that same day.
4To date, the Tribunal has not received any Request to Intervene from the Commission pursuant to Rule 14 of the Rules for Transitional Applications, nor has any correspondence been received from the Commission indicating an intention to request intervenor status or seeking an adjournment of the preliminary hearing on that basis.
5The Tribunal’s Practice Direction on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests, and Requests for Adjournments states:
The HRTO discourages requests for adjournments outside the ten-day period to request rescheduling of a hearing . . . . Requests for adjournments, particularly at the last minute, are a significant impediment to fair and timely access to justice. Therefore, the HRTO will only grant adjournments in extraordinary circumstances such as illness of a party, witness or representative. Absent exceptional circumstances, the HRTO will not grant adjournments, even when all parties consent.
Where a party seeks to adjourn a previously scheduled mediation or hearing, they must contact the Registrar as soon as the need arises. They must contact the other parties to seek their consent, and to discuss alternative dates for the rescheduling of the mediation or hearing.
The party making the request should contact the Registrar and provide the exceptional circumstances supporting the request and any alternative agreed upon dates. Where the request is on short notice, the party must contact the Registrar by email or fax, copied to the other parties.
6In the absence of any Request to Intervene having been filed by the Commission, or any correspondence from the Commission indicating an intention to seek intervenor status and requesting an adjournment of the preliminary hearing for that purpose, there is simply no basis upon which to grant the applicant’s adjournment request.
7The August 31, 2010 hearing date was set after the parties were afforded an opportunity to indicate their availability for the preliminary hearing, and the hearing was scheduled by correspondence from the Tribunal dated April 16, 2010.
8The applicant’s request for an adjournment of the preliminary hearing is denied, and the preliminary hearing will proceed as scheduled in Thunder Bay on August 31, 2010 commencing at 9:30 a.m.
9The Tribunal is aware that the parties have raised certain issues regarding documentation submitted to the Tribunal. To the extent that any such documentation is relevant to the issues to be addressed at the preliminary hearing, these issues may be raised before the adjudicator at that time.
10I am not seized.
Dated at Toronto, this 19th day of August, 2010.
“Signed by”
Mark Hart
Vice-chair