William Thomson v. Landlord and Tenant Board, 2011 HRTO 141

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

BETWEEN:

William Thomson Applicant

-and-

Landlord and Tenant Board Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Naomi Overend Date: January 19, 2011 Citation: 2011 HRTO 141 Indexed as: Thomson v. Landlord and Tenant Board

1This Interim Decision deals with the applicant’s Request to defer his Application until the Landlord and Tenant Board (the “respondent” or “LTB”) renders a decision in the eviction application brought by the applicant’s landlord. In the Request, the applicant noted that the LTB was scheduled to hear this matter on January 5, 2011.

2In his Application, the applicant alleges that the respondent discriminated against him with respect to services on the basis of disability contrary to s. 1 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, (the “Code”). The respondent has filed a Response requesting that the Application be dismissed on a preliminary basis and the applicant has filed a Reply.

3On December 16, 2010, this Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction directing that a summary hearing take place to determine whether this Application had no reasonable prospect of success. The applicant was directed to advise the Tribunal by January 5, 2011 whether he wished to proceed on the basis of written submissions. In the event that he elected to do so (or failed to elect by the specified date), the applicant was directed to provide written submissions to the Tribunal by January 30, 2011.

4On December 20, 2010, the applicant made his Request for deferral. He filed a form indicating that he served the deferral Request on the respondent. The respondent has not filed any submissions in respect of the Request with the Tribunal.

5The Tribunal may defer consideration of an application, on such terms as it may determine, and on its own initiative (Rule 14.1). The Tribunal has stated that deferral is not automatically invoked simply because the parties are involved in other legal proceedings. It is a discretionary measure that the Tribunal exercises on the basis of the circumstances in each case. Absent good reason, applicants and respondents before the Tribunal are entitled to expect the Tribunal to take timely action to resolve complaints of discrimination brought before it.

6In this case, it would appear that awaiting the decision of the LTB in the landlord’s eviction application will not unnecessarily prolong these proceedings. Should it be necessary to proceed at all, the summary hearing with respect to this Application will proceed with a more full factual record.

7In view of both this, and the fact that the respondent has not voiced any opposition to deferral of this matter, the Application will be deferred pending the completion of the landlord’s application for eviction. In the meantime, the Tribunal’s direction to the applicant to elect by January 5, 2011, and file written submissions on the summary hearing by January 30, 2011 is set aside.

8The Tribunal directs the parties’ attention to Rules 14.3 and 14.4 which outline the procedure by which the Application may be brought back on after the conclusion of the eviction application. The Tribunal will advise the parties of the new date for determining the manner in which the summary hearing will proceed in the event the Application is brought back on.

9I am not seized.