Fred Haggett v. Rehabilitation Network Canada Inc. and Marlene Cabral, 2011 HRTO 2137

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Fred Haggett

Applicant

-and-

Rehabilitation Network Canada Inc. and Marlene Cabral

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Michelle Flaherty

Date: November 28, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 2137

Indexed as: Haggett v. Rehabilitation Network Canada Inc.

1This Interim Decision addresses the applicant’s request for an extension of time to file a Response to a Request for an Order During Proceedings (“Request”). The respondents oppose the request for an extension of time.

2The applicant filed Application under section 34 of the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”). The respondents have filed a Response denying the allegations of discrimination.

3On September 29, 2011, the respondents also filed a Request seeking, among other things, the early dismissal of the Application because it is untimely. The applicant did not file a Response to the Request within the timelines provided in the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure.

4On November 16, 2011, the applicant wrote to the Tribunal and copied the respondents seeking an extension of time in which to file a Response. He states that he did not file a Response within the timeframe provided in the Rules because he spoke to administrative staff at the Tribunal and he misunderstood the information they conveyed to him. In short, he states that he did not file a Response to the Request within the time limits because of he believed that he was not required to take further steps until he received further documents from the Tribunal.

5The respondent opposes the request for an extension of time. It states that the applicant’s request for an extension of time comes more than a month after the submissions were due and that the applicant has not described circumstances that justify his request. Further, the respondents state that the Application was filed out of time and that the applicant has a history of failing to take action in a timely manner.

DECISION

6Rule 1.7 of the Tribunal’s Rules state that the Tribunal may lengthen any time limit provided for in the Rules. In the circumstances, I am prepared to grant the applicant a short extension of time in which to file a Response.

7Within five days of the date of this Interim Decision, the applicant may deliver to the respondents and file with the Tribunal a Response to the Request.

8Should the applicant fail to provide submissions within this timeframe, the Tribunal may determine the Request on the basis of the materials filed or it may deem the applicant to have abandoned the Application.

9I am not seized of this matter.