HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Julie Bobb Applicant
-and-
Mount Sinai Hospital and Allan Gordon Respondents
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Ena Chadha Date: June 16, 2011 Citation: 2011 HRTO 1173 Indexed as: Bobb v. Mount Sinai Hospital
1This Application was filed on February 17, 2011 under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended ("Code").
2The respondents filed their respective Responses on May 13, 2011. Both respondents request the Tribunal to defer the Application pending the resolution of a complaint filed by the applicant with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (the "College"). The respondents submit that the Application should be deferred because the applicant's complaint to the College is based on the same facts and makes the same allegations. The respondents submit that the College is currently investigating the complaint.
3The respondents state that the applicant's complaint to the College cannot be provided to the Tribunal because of section 36(3) of the Regulated Health Professions Act ("RHPA") which prohibits the disclosure of any documents used in an RHPA proceeding for the purpose of any other civil proceeding.
4On May 17, 2011, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer which notified the applicant that the Tribunal was considering whether or not it would be appropriate to defer the Application pending the resolution of the applicant's complaint to the College. The Tribunal invited the applicant to file submissions in this regard.
5The applicant filed submissions on May 26, 2011 objecting to the deferral. The applicant materials appear to indicate that she filed her complaint with the College shortly prior to this Application and that complaint alleges that the personal respondent sexually harassed her and provided her with inadequate care.
DECISION
6Deferral of an application ensures that proceedings dealing with the same issues do not run concurrently, thereby raising the possibility of inconsistent decisions on facts or law. However, deferral is not automatically invoked simply because the parties are involved in other legal proceedings.
7Some of the factors that may be relevant in deciding whether to defer consideration of an application before the Tribunal are the subject matter of the other proceeding, the nature of the other proceeding, the type of remedies available in the other proceeding, and whether it would be fair overall to the parties to defer, having regard to the status of each proceeding and the steps that have been taken to pursue them.
8Although the Tribunal does not have a copy of the applicant's complaint to the College, it appears based on the information provided by the applicant that the College complaint and this Application are substantially similar.
9While it is clear that there is an overlap in the facts in the Application and the complaint to the College, a number of factors suggest that deferral is not appropriate. First, it does not appear to be concurrent litigation given the respondents' submission that the complaint is presently being investigated. As such, at this time, it appears the complaint at the College is only at the initial investigation stage and it is uncertain whether it will proceed to a full hearing. Second, the complaint to the College appears to only relate to the allegations against the personal respondent and the respondent Hospital does not appear to be party.
10Accordingly, the Tribunal is of the view that this is not an appropriate case in which to exercise its discretion to defer this proceeding. The respondents' requests to defer are denied. If, during the processing of this Application, the College makes a decision on the complaint, the Tribunal can determine what effect, if any, to give to such decision in determining the issues in this Application.
11The personal respondent is directed to write to the Tribunal, copied to the other parties, within 14 days of the date of this Interim Decision, and advise whether or not he is amenable to participating in mediation.
Dated at Toronto, this June 16th, 2011.
"signed by"______________
Ena Chadha
Vice-chair