Paris Odede v. Sanmina-SCI Systems Corporation, 2010 HRTO 832

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Paris Odede

Applicant

-and-

Sanmina-SCI Systems Corporation

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Mark Hart

Date: April 16, 2010

Citation: 2010 HRTO 832

Indexed as: Odede v. Sanmina-SCI Systems

1This Application was filed December 18, 2008, under section 53(3) of Part VI of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"). A Case Resolution Conference ("hearing") is scheduled for April 23, 2010.

2The purpose of this Interim Decision is to address the respondent's Request for Order dated March 29, 2010 seeking an order requiring production of certain documents and information from the applicant. No Response to Request for Order was received from the applicant within 14 days of service of the Request, as required by the Tribunal's Rules.

3The respondent first requests an order requiring the applicant or his representative to produce all supporting documentation for the out-of-pocket expenses sought by the applicant as part of his requested remedy, including but not limited to receipts for all expenses claimed, as well as particulars describing the relevance of these alleged expenses to the applicant's claim. These documents and information are clearly relevant to the remedy sought by the applicant, and I order them to be provided.

4The respondent next requests evidence of the applicant's mitigation efforts during the eight-month period following his termination for which he claims to have been unemployed, including a list of positions for which he applied, as well as the names and contact information of any contact persons at the corresponding organizations. Once again, this information is clearly relevant to the remedy sought by the applicant, and I order it to be provided.

5The respondent finally requests all supporting medical documentation with respect to the applicant's alleged psychological and physical damages, including the particulars of his diagnoses and copies of doctor's notes for the period following termination and for the three years preceding his termination, as well as particulars describing the manner in which the respondent caused or contributed to these alleged psychological and physical damages.

6In the relief sought, the applicant makes a claim for "physical and psychological anguish" among other things. It is up to the applicant to decide whether he intends to rely upon medical evidence to support this claim. If the applicant had intended to rely upon medical evidence, then any medical reports already should have been disclosed to the respondent and filed with the Tribunal. As no such disclosure has been made and no notice has been given that the applicant intends to call any medical evidence through his witnesses, I can only assume that the applicant does not intend to rely upon any such evidence at the hearing. As a result, I decline to make the order requested by the respondent.

7Given the late date at which the respondent's request was made, I can only reasonably require the applicant to come to the hearing on April 23, 2010 with the documents and information that I have ordered be produced to the respondent. The applicant also should bring a second copy of this material to file with the Tribunal at that time.

8This does not, however, mean that the Case Resolution Conference scheduled for April 23, 2010, need be adjourned. As all of the respondent's requests relate to the remedies sought by the applicant, I would propose to bifurcate the hearing to deal first with the issue of whether the respondent violated the applicant's rights under the Code, and then on a subsequent date, if necessary, address the applicant's request for remedy. I will hear submissions from the parties on this issue at the outset of next Friday's hearing.

9The respondent also has proposed that the parties engage in mediation on April 23, 2010. As this day has been scheduled for the hearing in this matter, I am not prepared to convert it to mediation. However, at the outset of the hearing, I will discuss with the parties whether they are prepared to consent to mediation-adjudication, whereby I would attempt to assist the parties in resolving the matter but retain my ability to act as the adjudicator on that day if the case cannot be resolved.