Ozen v. Label Innovation Inc., 2011 HRTO 1022

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Kim Ozen

Applicant

-and-

Label Innovation Inc.

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Brian Eyolfson

Date: May 30, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 1022

Indexed as: Ozen v. Label Innovation Inc.

1The applicant filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), on March 4, 2010, alleging discrimination on the basis of disability in employment. The purpose of this Interim Decision is to address the applicant’s Requests to Expedite and for an Order During Proceedings, filed with the Tribunal on May 13, 2011.

2The applicant provided a Statement of Delivery indicating that the Requests were delivered to the respondent on May 4, 2011, however, the respondent has not responded to the Requests and the time for doing so has passed.

REQUEST TO EXPEDITE

3The applicant submits that if her Request to Expedite is denied it will be too late to rectify the difficulties she has sustained since the alleged discrimination. With respect to the harm that would result if the Request is denied, the applicant refers to a number of financial difficulties she has encountered, including: a disconnection notice from “hydro” for non-payment of arrears, which will result in the applicant and her children going without the basic necessities of life such as water, as they are on a well system, and heat; an eviction notice for non-payment of rent; and, the prospect of losing their only vehicle for non-payment and the difficulties that will result given that they live in a rural area.

4With respect to her health, the applicant states that the symptoms of her medical conditions have become so severe that she is no longer able to search for or retain employment. She expresses concerns for her health, in terms of the prolonged use of the medication she is currently taking and the possibility of her health further deteriorating, if this matter is not resolved in a timely fashion.

5The applicant’s fiancé provided a signed declaration in support of the Request to Expedite, confirming many of the financial difficulties that the applicant refers to, and also indicating that the symptoms of the applicant’s medical condition have become so severe that she has had to increase medications.

6The applicant’s physician also provided a signed letter, indicating her opinion that the applicant’s symptoms are being adversely affected by her current legal matters, and that it is difficult to properly treat her condition while this matter is ongoing.

7The 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 that 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.

8In 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.

9Having regard to all of the circumstances, the Request to Expedite is granted. I am satisfied that, when considered together, the applicant’s current financial difficulties and health issues, which her physician indicates are adversely affected by this matter, are circumstances that may affect the fair and just resolution of the merits of the Application.

10The Tribunal notes that the applicant refers to an “interim remedy” but has not indicated what interim remedy, if any, she is seeking, nor has she otherwise complied with the Tribunal’s Rules with respect to interim remedies. Accordingly, this Interim Decision does not address the issue of interim remedy.

REQUEST FOR AN ORDER DURING PROCEEDINGS

11The applicant also filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings to amend the amount of monetary compensation requested in the Application. As noted above, the respondent has not responded to this Request. In the circumstances, the applicant’s Request to amend her Application with respect to the monetary compensation she is seeking is granted.

ORDER

12The applicant’s Requests are granted. The Tribunal will schedule the hearing of this Application in July 2011. The timelines for the disclosure and delivery of documents and witness statements, set out in Rules 16 and 17 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure, are abridged and shall take place within 21 days of the date of this Interim Decision.

13I am not seized of this matter.