Razi v. 122164 Canada Limited, 2011 HRTO 1934

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Azam Razi

Applicant

-and-

122164 Canada Limited, Michael Perrin, Asad Mohamood and Nirav Thakkar

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Ena Chadha

Date: October 26, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 1934

Indexed as: Razi v. 122164 Canada Limited

1The applicant filed this Application on January 13, 2011, under section 34 of the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), alleging discrimination with respect to employment on the basis of disability.

2The respondents filed a Response on July 19, 2011, denying the allegations of discrimination. The respondents request that the Tribunal defer the Application because the facts of the Application are part of Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (“WSIB”) proceeding. The respondents contend that the WSIB has exclusive jurisdiction over the issues raised in the Application.

3The applicant filed a Reply on October 7, 2011, opposing the respondents’ request to defer. The applicant asserts that the Application should not be deferred because the applicant’s WSIB claim was closed as of August 2010.

DECISION

4The Tribunal may defer consideration of an application, on such terms as it may determine, on its own initiative or at the request of any party (Rule 14.1). Deferral 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.

5Some factors that have been identified as 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 types 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. See Baghdasserians v. 674469 Ontario, 2008 HRTO 404.

6Pursuant to section 10(e) of the Code, which defines disability to include “an injury or disability for which benefits were claimed or received under the insurance plan established under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997,” the Tribunal has jurisdiction over disability-related WSIB matters.

7Based on the information provided by the applicant, it appears that the WSIB claim has closed and there is no active proceeding.

8As such I see no basis to defer the Application given that the WSIB process is concluded and there is no appeal. The respondents’ request to defer this Application is denied.

9Given the parties have indicated an interest in mediation, the Tribunal will schedule a mediation for the Application.

10I am not seized of this matter.