HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Marina Medakovic
Applicant
-and-
Toronto Transit Commission and Richard Ridge
Respondents
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Keith Brennenstuhl
Indexed as: Medakovic v. Toronto Transit Commission
1This matter is scheduled for hearing on September 22 and 23, 2011.
2The applicant is currently in Belgrade, Serbia tending to her ailing mother. The applicant had previously advised the Tribunal that her intention was to return to Toronto by the end of August, 2011 but she was not certain as her mother’s health is variable. She now advises the Tribunal that her mother remains critically ill. She indicates that she has to postpone her return to Toronto and that she will not be able to attend the hearing on the dates scheduled. She asks that her file be placed on “hold”.
3The respondents oppose an indefinite and unlimited adjournment of the Application, and request that if the Tribunal grants an adjournment that the applicant be required to advise the Tribunal and the respondents of her intention to continue with the Application and her commitment to attend newly scheduled hearing dates, failing which the Application be dismissed. The respondents submit that any adjournment should not exceed the lesser of six months or thirty days from the date that the applicant returns to Ontario.
4This proceeding can simply not languish indefinitely. As sympathetic as the Tribunal may be to the applicant’s circumstances, I am concerned that the evidence grows staler with each passing day. The applicant’s allegations include things that the personal respondent is alleged to have said to her. This type of evidence is particularly vulnerable to the impact of delay and fading memories. There may come a point where the delay in proceeding with this matter has caused sufficient prejudice to the respondents as to affect the fairness of the hearing, such that the Application may be vulnerable to dismissal. See Blencoe v. British Columbia (Human Rights Commission) 2000 SCC 44, [2000] S.C.J. No. 43 and Ford Motor Co. of Canada v. Ontario (Human Rights Commission) (1995), 1995 CanLII 7431 (ON CTGD), 24 C.H.R.R. D/464 (Div. Ct.).
5For now, in the circumstances, the hearing scheduled for September 22 and 23, 2011 is cancelled. The applicant is to advise the Tribunal and the respondents as soon as she is able to proceed with this matter, or, in any event, within three months of this Interim Decision the applicant is required to advise the Tribunal and the respondents as to the status of her return to Toronto. Upon receipt of confirmation from the applicant indicating that she is able to proceed with her Application, the Tribunal will then set new dates for the hearing.
6I am hereby suspending the respondents pre-hearing obligations indefinitely and until further notice.
Dated at Toronto, this 29^th^ day of July, 2011.
”signed by”______________
Keith Brennenstuhl
Vice-chair