HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Raymond Knapp
Applicant
-and-
West Grey Police Services Board and Rene Berger
Respondents
AND B E T W E E N:
Raymond Knapp
Applicant
-and-
West Grey Police Services Board, Rene Berger and Dale Smart
Respondents
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Kaye Joachim
Date: February 8, 2010
Citation: 2010 HRTO 277
Indexed as: Knapp v. West Grey Police Services Board
[1] A Hearing in this matter is scheduled for February 9, 2010. The hearing was scheduled by Notice from the Tribunal dated November 17, 2009. This Interim Decision addresses the applicant’s request for an adjournment.
[2] The applicant sent a letter to the Tribunal dated January 24, 2010, received by the Tribunal January 27, 2010, seeking an adjournment on the basis that he was undergoing dental surgery on January 26, 2010 and needed time to recover from the surgery. He suggested that he would be able to attend the week of February 22, 2010.
[3] The respondents objected to the requested adjournment. The Tribunal directed the applicant to provide medical confirmation that he would not able to participate the hearing due to the surgery and an explanation for the delay in advising the Tribunal of the surgery.
[4] The applicant explained that although the surgery had been scheduled since December, he had hoped to cancel it and reschedule it for after the hearing. However, his dental condition did not improve so he decided to proceed with the surgery.
[5] The applicant submitted a medical confirmation from his dental surgeon confirming the surgery took place on January 26, 2010. However, the surgeon does not address the alleged incapacity to attend the hearing on February 9, 2010. Nor are there any details about the surgery that make it self-evident that the applicant would not be able to attend the hearing.
[6] While the Tribunal’s Information Bulletin on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests and Requests for Adjournments does not specifically apply to Transition Applications, nonetheless the principles set out in this Information Bulletin are equally applicable to Transition Applications.
[7] The Tribunal’s Information Bulletin provides that requests to reschedule must be made within five (5) days of receiving the Confirmation of Hearing and that thereafter, adjournments will be granted only in extraordinary circumstances. The Information Bulletin states the following regarding requests for adjournments:
Requests for adjournment, particularly last minute requests for adjournments are a significant impediment to fair and timely access to justice.
The Tribunal’s approach to scheduling and rescheduling mediations and hearings is designed to give the parties a fair opportunity to find suitable dates. Therefore, the Tribunal discourages adjournment requests, and will only grant adjournments in extraordinary circumstances such as illness of a party, witness or representative.
The Tribunal will not automatically grant adjournments even when all parties consent. Consent of all parties will be a factor which the Tribunal will consider where a request to adjourn a mediation or hearing is made, but it is not the only, or even the main factor.
Where a party seeks to adjourn a previously scheduled mediation or hearing, they must contact the Registrar as soon as the need arises. If practical, they should contact the other parties to seek their consent, and to discuss alternate dates for the rescheduling of the mediation or hearing. Alternate dates for mediation must fall within five (5) months of the date of the Notice of Application. Alternative dates for a hearing must fall within five (5) months of the date of the Confirmation of Hearing.
The party making the request should contact the Registrar and provide the reason for the request and the alternative agreed upon dates. Where the request is on short notice, the party must contact the Registrar by telephone or email.
The Tribunal typically will not adjourn a hearing date because the parties wish to “engage in settlement discussions” or are “close to a deal”. The Tribunal encourages mediation and settlements, and will assist the parties in this regard. Where parties believe they may be able to resolve a matter shortly before the scheduled hearing, they should advise the Registrar and the Tribunal will make a mediator and mediation room available. However, the Tribunal discourages the cancellation or adjournment of hearing dates so that the parties can explore settlement.
[8] The reasons for the Request do not constitute exceptional circumstances that would permit an adjournment. The applicant has known since November 2009 that the hearing was scheduled in February 2010 and had the opportunity to request a rescheduling due to the surgery. Also, the Tribunal is not satisfied based on the documentation provided by the applicant that there is a health-related reason to adjourn the hearing: Vizcaya v University of Toronto [2009 HRTO 2128](https://www.minicounsel.ca/hrto/2009/2128).
[9] The request for adjournment is denied.
Dated at Toronto, this 8th day of February, 2010.
“Signed by”
Kaye Joachim
Alternate Chair