Arifahemad Patel v. Canon Canada Inc., Leena Nagapal and Cory Mariani, 2010 HRTO 230

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Arifahemad Patel

Applicant

-and-

Canon Canada Inc., Leena Nagapal and Cory Mariani

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Sherry Liang

Date: February 1, 2010

Citation: 2010 HRTO 230

Indexed as: Patel v. Canon Canada

1The applicant filed an Application with the Tribunal alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability and reprisal contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”). The applicant states he was dismissed from his employment in December 2009. He has filed a Request to Expedite his Application, stating that his former employer is in the process of filling his position and, if he is successful in his Application, he will be unable to regain the position he held. He also cites his inability to obtain references from his former employer, thus impeding his search for new employment; financial harm; and emotional pressures that will be experienced by himself and his family.

2The Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure provide for applications to be dealt with in an expedited manner in urgent circumstances. Rule 21.1 provides that an applicant may request that the Tribunal deal with an application on an expedited basis in circumstances which require an urgent resolution of the issues in dispute. Rule 21.2 requires an applicant seeking an expedited application to identify any urgent circumstances that may affect the fair and just resolution of the merits of the application and the harm that would result if the request is denied.

3In Weerawardane v. 2152458 Ontario Ltd., 2008 HRTO 53, at para. 9 the Tribunal held that, for a request to expedite to be granted, the applicant must demonstrate that the circumstances are truly urgent, requiring the resolution of the human rights dispute in a particularly rapid manner as compared with the time required to complete the Tribunal’s regular process.

4In accordance with Rules 5.2 and 21.3 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure, the Tribunal does not require a Response to Request to Expedite from the respondents. Having reviewed the applicant’s materials, I cannot conclude that this Request to Expedite meets the high threshold required by the Tribunal’s jurisprudence.

5The Tribunal has held that the factors the applicant describes, including financial and emotional pressures from loss of employment and the risk that an applicant’s former position may be filled by another person, do not constitute the type of urgent circumstances requiring an expedited process; see Russell v. Georgina (Town), 2009 HRTO 466. Without questioning the sincerity of the applicant’s concerns, in my view, the harm the applicant alleges he will suffer is not an urgent circumstance which warrants giving this Application priority for Tribunal resources over other matters. The Request to Expedite is denied.

6I am not seized.