Gibbs v. Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, 2010 HRTO 794

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

David Gibbs

Applicant

-and-

Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, Don Murphy and Bruce Davidson

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Ailsa Jane Wiggins

Date: April 13, 2010

Citation: 2010 HRTO 794

Indexed as: Gibbs v. Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board

1This is an Application filed on January 16, 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 applicant alleges that he was discriminated against in his employment on the basis of disability. The hearing commenced on January 12, 2010. It was scheduled to resume on March 25 and 26, 2010, but was adjourned by the Tribunal due to the applicant’s failure to provide full disclosure in a timely manner.

2The purpose of this Interim Decision is to address disclosure and other case management issues.

3On January 12, 2010, I explained the disclosure requirements to the applicant and the parties agreed on a disclosure schedule. In order to clarify the scope of the Application and to conduct the hearing in an expeditious manner, I asked the applicant to provide a detailed statement setting out all the facts of his case in chronological order. I also asked the parties to provide detailed witness statements to help expedite the hearing. These requirements were confirmed in a January 18, 2010 letter from the Tribunal. In addition, an Interim Decision, dated January 14, 2010, ordered the disclosure of documents relating to the applicant’s claim for long-term disability benefits.

4The applicant did not comply fully with the requirements of the January 18, 2010 letter from the Tribunal or Interim Decision dated January 14, 2010.

5In an Interim Decision dated March 10, 2010, the applicant was ordered to provide the balance of the arguably relevant documents in his possession or within his power to obtain and the detailed witness statements within seven days of the date of the Interim Decision or the Tribunal would cancel the March 25 and 26, 2010 hearing dates.

6The applicant provided revised witness statements and more, but not all, of the arguably relevant documents on March 16, 2010.

7In light of the applicant’s incomplete disclosure the Tribunal cancelled the March 25 and 26, 2010 hearing dates.

8The balance of the arguably relevant documents in the applicant’s possession or within his power to obtain must be disclosed in order for the hearing of this matter to proceed.

9The revised statement of the applicant’s witness Sarah Besenyei refers to e-mails not previously disclosed. These are arguably relevant documents and as such they must be disclosed.

10As the materials filed by the applicant referred to facts not mentioned in his original complaint, the applicant was asked to file a detailed witness statement setting out exactly what his case was about to clarify the scope of this Application. The revised witness statement of the applicant contains fewer details than his original witness statement and does not set out all of the incidents referred to in the materials that he previously filed. If the applicant wishes to rely on incidents not referred to in his revised witness statement, he must file a new statement containing all the facts on which he wishes to rely.

11The Tribunal makes the following orders:

(a) the applicant is ordered to provide all other documents relating to his application for long-term disability benefits and the subsequent litigation that are in his possession or within his power to obtain, including any and all supporting documents which were part of the application, medical or otherwise; any correspondence from Sun Life; the statement of defence and any other pleading; and copies of the documents disclosed or received during the course of the litigation, within seven days of the date of this Interim Decision;

(b) the applicant is ordered to provide a detailed witness statement setting out exactly what he will say and what his case is about, including all the alleged incidents on which he is relying in chronological order, or confirm that all the alleged incidents on which he is relying are contained in the witness statement provided on March 16, 2010, within seven days of the date of this Interim Decision;

(c) the applicant is ordered to provide copies of the e-mails referred to in Sarah Besenyei’s witness statement within seven days of the date of this Interim Decision;

(d) if the applicant does not provide the above mentioned documents to the respondents and the Tribunal within seven days of the date of this Interim Decision, the Tribunal will take whatever action it considers appropriate in the circumstances;

(e) the respondents will provide amended witness statements, new witness statements and additional documents, if any, within 21 days of the date of this Interim Decision; and,

(f) within 21 days of the date of this Interim Decision the parties will contact the Tribunal and provide at least three sets of two consecutive days when they are available to resume the hearing of this matter.