minicounsel

Jason Thibault v. Ontario Provincial Police, 2010 HRTO 700 — HRTO | minicounsel | minicounsel

March 30, 2010

Jason Thibault v. Ontario Provincial Police, 2010 HRTO 700

Case Summary

The respondent requested the removal of the OPP Commissioner as a personal respondent and the deferral of the human rights application pending the completion of a related Ontario Civilian Police Commission (OCPC) complaints process. The applicant consented to both requests. The Tribunal granted the requests, removing the personal respondent and deferring the application until the conclusion of the OCPC process.

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Jason Thibault

Applicant

-and-

Ontario Provincial Police

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Eric Whist

Date: March 30, 2010

Citation: 2010 HRTO 700

Indexed as: Thibault v. Ontario Provincial Police

[1] This Interim Decision addresses requests made by the respondent to remove a personal respondent and to defer the Application filed by the applicant under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended, (the “Code”).

[2] The Application names Julian Fantino, the Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner as a personal respondent. The respondent has requested Commissioner Fantino be removed as a personal respondent. The respondent’s submissions in support of this request are made in reference to the principles the Tribunal has set out in [Persaud v. Toronto District School Board, 2008 HRTO 31](https://www.minicounsel.ca/hrto/2008/31) to determine whether a personal respondent should be removed. .

[3] The respondent further requests that the Application be deferred pending the result of a review of complaints made by the applicant to the Ontario Civilian Police Commission (“OCPC”). The respondent submits that the complaints before the OCPC deal with the same subject matter and alleged incidents as those outlined in the Application before the Tribunal. The respondent submits that the Tribunal has generally deferred Applications where there is an ongoing adjudicative process based on the same facts and human rights issues.

[4] The applicant has written to the Tribunal to state that he is not opposed to the removal of the personal respondent as a party to the Application and to the deferral of the Application pending the completion of the police complaint process.

[5] Having reviewed the respondent’s submissions and having considered the applicant’s position I am prepared to grant the respondent’s requests. Commissioner Fantino is removed as personal respondent and the style of cause is amended accordingly. The Tribunal orders the deferral of the Application pending the completion of the OCPC complaints process.

[6] Where a party wishes to proceed with an application which has been deferred, the party must make a Request for an Order During Proceedings in accordance with Rule 19 within 60 days after the conclusion of the other proceeding (Rules 14.3 and 14.4).

[7] I am not seized of this matter.

Dated at Toronto, this 30^th^ day of March, 2010.

“Signed By”

Eric Whist

Vice-chair