HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Anita Magnoli
Applicant
-and-
First Choice Canada Inc. o/a Signature Vacations
Respondent
interim decision
Adjudicator: Keith Brennenstuhl
Indexed as: Magnoli v. First Choice Canada
1A hearing in this matter is scheduled for September 13, 14 and 15, 2011. On August 23, 2011 the applicant requested that it be adjourned. The reason given for the Request is “for both family and medical reasons”.
[2] The request for an adjournment is denied. The Tribunal’s Practice Direction on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests and Requests for Adjournments provides that requests to reschedule must be made within five (5) days of receiving the Confirmation of Hearing and that thereafter, adjournments will be granted only in extraordinary circumstances.
3In Vallentyne v. Royal Canadian Legion, 2009 HRTO 660 at para. 4, the Tribunal held:
The Tribunal is committed to the fair, just and expeditious resolution of proceedings before it. It expects to receive thousands of applications each year. The Tribunal has a responsibility to ensure that public resources are used effectively to meet the demands of all parties before the Tribunal. Therefore, when an adjournment request is made, it is not only the interests of the parties to the particular proceeding must consider, but the fact that Tribunal time reserved for the resolution of those parties’ dispute will no longer be used. For that reason, among others, the Tribunal’s Information Bulletin on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests and Requests for Adjournments indicates that even adjournment requests made on consent of the parties more than five days after the hearing is scheduled may be denied. The Tribunal has balanced the interests of parties in having hearings scheduled according to their and counsel’s availability with these broader interests by requiring that a party advise within five days that they are unavailable, and providing that requests for adjournment will not otherwise be granted, absent exceptional circumstances.
5The parties were notified of the hearing in this matter on June 15, 2011. The request for an adjournment is made well beyond five days after the Notice of the hearing. The reason for the request is vague and lacks particulars. The request for adjournment cites no exceptional circumstances that justify an adjournment in accordance with the Tribunal’s policies and jurisprudence.
6I note that the Respondent had made a Request for Order During Proceedings (“Request”) seeking the dismissal of the Application for failure to disclose a prima facie case of discrimination. I also note that the Tribunal, by Interim Decision dated November 1, 2010, dismissed the Request for reasons cited therein but without prejudice to the respondent’s ability to request dismissal of the Application at the hearing on the basis that the applicant has not established a prima facie case.
7Under the circumstances, the parties should be prepared to address the Request for dismissal, by way of oral submissions, at the commencement of the hearing on September 13, 2011.
[8 . It is unnecessary for the respondent to respond to the Request for Adjournment. The Request for Adjournment is denied.
Dated at Toronto this 29th day of August, 2011.
”signed by”__________
Keith Brennenstuhl
Vice-chair