Traynor v. ACS Advanced Cutting Solutions, 2010 HRTO 1862

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Laura Traynor Applicant

-and-

ACS Advanced Cutting Solutions, Branco Arsenijevich and Joe Skoroja Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Ailsa Jane Wiggins Date: September 10, 2010 Citation: 2010 HRTO 1862 Indexed as: Traynor v. ACS Advanced Cutting Solutions

1This is an Application filed on August 2, 2009 under section 34 of Part VI of the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”). The applicant alleges that she was discriminated against in her employment on the basis of sex and subjected to reprisal. The hearing is scheduled for September 21, 2010.

2The purpose of this Interim Decision is to address case management issues raised in a Request for Order During Proceedings filed by the applicant on September 3, 2010 and the respondents’ request for an adjournment set out in an e-mail dated September 4, 2010.

3The applicant does not consent to the respondents’ request for an adjournment.

4The Tribunal’s Practice Direction on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests, and Requests for Adjournments states that requests for rescheduling of hearings must be made within 10 days of the date of the Confirmation of Hearing. The Confirmation of Hearing of this Application was dated March 24, 2010. Requests for adjournment outside of the ten day period will only be granted in exceptional circumstances such as the illness of a party, witness or representative, even when all parties consent. The respondents are asking for an adjournment to prepare their case. They have known for over five months that the hearing was scheduled for September 21, 2010. They have had adequate time to prepare their case. They have not advised the Tribunal of any extraordinary circumstances. The request for an adjournment is denied. The hearing will proceed on September 21, 2010.

5The respondents have not met their disclosure requirements. These requirements were set out in the original Confirmation of Hearing dated March 8, 2010.

6On August 17, 2010, the applicant’s representative, the Human Rights Legal Support Centre, wrote to the respondents reminding them of their disclosure requirements and requesting the information by no later than August 20, 2010. They did not comply.

7On September 3, 2010, the applicant filed a Request for Order During Proceedings, requesting particulars and production of documents.

8Failing to comply with disclosure requirements established in the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure can have serious consequences.

9Rule 16.4 provides that a party may not rely on or present any document at the hearing which was not included on a document list and provided to the other parties and the Tribunal, except with the permission of the Tribunal.

10Rule 17.4 provides that no party may call as a witness at a hearing any person whose name and summary of evidence was not included in a witness list which was delivered to the other parties and the Tribunal, except with the permission of the Tribunal.

11The Tribunal has the discretion to accept materials beyond the timelines set out in the Rules where it is fair, just and expeditious to do so.

12The Tribunal makes the following orders:

(a) the hearing will proceed on September 21, 2010;

(b) the respondents are ordered to immediately provide to the applicant all arguably relevant documents in their possession, excluding any documents for which privilege is claimed;

(c) the respondents are ordered to immediately provide to the applicant a list of those arguably relevant documents upon which they intend to rely at the hearing and to file copies of those documents with the Tribunal; and,

(d) the respondents are ordered to immediately provide to the applicant and the Tribunal detailed witness statements setting out what the individual respondents and their witnesses will say at the hearing.