Lisa Izso v. Canadian Agra Limited and Bruce Agra Inc., 2010 HRTO 518

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Lisa Izso

Applicant

-and-

Canadian Agra Limited and Bruce Agra Inc.

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Kathleen Martin
Date: March 9, 2010
Citation: 2010 HRTO 518
Indexed as: Izso v. Canadian Agra

1This is an Application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability and record of offences contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"). The applicant was laid off following her return to work after being off for several months due to a heart attack. The applicant has filed a Request to Expedite the Application, citing, among other things, that she is "petrified" that the added stress of her situation may cause a relapse of her medical condition. She identifies the possibility that she could have "another heart attack, stroke or die" as the harm that could result if her Request is denied.

2The applicant was employed for approximately four years by the respondent. She states that she was terminated upon her return to work on January 7, 2010. The applicant states that without her daily medications she is at risk for having another heart attack or stroke. She states that as a result of her job loss, she no longer has the benefits that she desperately needs, which I presume includes coverage for medications, although she does not state so expressly. In describing her health, the applicant refers to having difficulty sleeping and eating and feeling like her heart is "jumping" out of her chest. While the applicant refers to an upcoming appointment with a heart specialist, no medical information is included with the Request nor does she indicate that she has sought medical attention about her condition since her termination.

3The respondents have filed a Response to the Request to Expedite indicating they do not oppose the Request and that they are agreeable to mediation.

4The 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.

5In 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. The Tribunal went on to state that the financial consequences for a dismissed employee may constitute such a justification in some circumstances particularly if there is reason to believe that these will lead to other significant consequences which may not be easily remedied.

6Having reviewed the materials filed by the parties, I am not prepared to grant the Request. While the respondents' consent is a factor, ultimately the Tribunal must still determine whether the circumstances relied on to support the Request are truly urgent so as to warrant giving this Application priority over other applications. Without questioning the sincerity of the applicant's belief that the absence of benefits could put her health at risk, ultimately she has framed her concerns as a possibility and the materials do not otherwise contain details that would enable me to conclude that there will be significant consequences if the matter is not expedited. The Request to Expedite is denied.

7Should the applicant have additional information regarding her health status that she wishes to submit, nothing herein precludes the applicant from filing a fresh Request to Expedite.

8The applicant and respondents have indicated their willingness to participate in mediation of the issues. A mediation will be scheduled for the earliest available date following the filing of the Response.

9I am not seized.