Mary Naidu v. Whitby Mental Health Centre and Peter Prendergast, 2010 HRTO 513

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Mary Naidu

Applicant

-and-

Whitby Mental Health Centre and Peter Prendergast

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Kaye Joachim

Date: March 8, 2010

Citation: 2010 HRTO 513

Indexed as: Naidu v. Whitby Mental Health Centre

1This is an Application filed May 11, 2009 under section 53(5) of Part VI of the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"). The Case Resolution Conference is scheduled for March 29, 2010.

2This Interim Decision deals with the applicant's request that I recuse myself from further involvement in this Application on the basis of my Interim Decision of February 10, 2010.

3In my Interim Decision, I denied the applicant's request for production as premature and also addressed the scope of the Application. I directed the applicant to provide further clarification of the scope of the Application.

4The applicant asserts that this direction indicates a reasonable apprehension of bias against the applicant as the responding party had asked for such clarification. I disagree. The Tribunal routinely issues Interim Decisions and Case Assessment Directions on its own initiative to ensure a fair, just and expeditious hearing process. The Tribunal's authority to take active management is authorized by both the Code and the Tribunal's Rules:

5Sections 40 and 41 of the Code provides:

40. The Tribunal shall dispose of applications made under this Part by adopting the procedures and practices provided for in its rules or otherwise available to the Tribunal which, in its opinion, offer the best opportunity for a fair, just and expeditious resolution of the merits of the applications.

41. This Part and the Tribunal rules shall be liberally construed to permit the Tribunal to adopt practices and procedures, including alternatives to traditional adjudicative or adversarial procedures that, in the opinion of the Tribunal, will facilitate fair, just and expeditious resolutions of the merits of the matters before it.

6The Rules of Procedure for Transitional Applications under Section 53(3) and 53(5) of the Human Rights Code provide:

4.1 The Tribunal may exercise any of its powers under these Rules at the request of a party or on its own initiative in accordance with Rule 1.1.

4.3 To ensure the fair, just and highly expeditious resolution of an Application under section 53(3) or section 53(5) of the Code the Tribunal may:

a) lengthen or shorten any time limit in these Rules;

b) add or remove a party;

c) vary or waive the application of these Rules at any time on its own initiative or on the request of a party, with or without terms;

d) defer consideration of an application;

e) determine and direct the order in which issues in a proceeding will be considered and determined;

f) define and narrow the issues in order to decide an Application;

g) limit the evidence and the submissions of the parties on any issue;

h) determine and direct the order in which evidence will be presented;

i) admit evidence without examination under oath or affirmation;

j) question a witness in chief or in cross-examination;

k) require a party or other person to produce any document, information or thing;

l) make such further orders as are necessary to give effect to an order or direction under these Rules;

m) attach terms or conditions to any order or direction; and,

n) take any other action that the Tribunal determines is appropriate.

7Accordingly I am neither seized nor disqualified from hearing this Application.