Janes v. Wright, 2011 HRTO 2304

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Rose Janes

Applicant

-and-

Murray Wright

Respondent

INTERIM decision

Adjudicator: Douglas Sanderson

Date: December 23, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 2304

Indexed as: Janes v. Wright

wRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Rose Janes, Applicant ) Leslie M. Flemming, Counsel

Murray Wright, Respondent ) Self-represented

1This is an Application filed November 27, 2009, under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), alleging discrimination in housing because of receipt of public assistance. The purpose of this Interim Decision is to address the respondent’s Request for Order during Proceedings (“the Request”) and to provide direction to both the applicant and respondent regarding their disclosure requirements.

2The applicant alleges the respondent refused to rent a house located at 11 East Road in Baysville, Ontario (the “house”) to her when the respondent learned that the applicant and her family were in receipt of public assistance. Among other things, the applicant alleges that she and her husband, David Harris, expended considerable effort and money to make the house ready to move into before the respondent resiled from the agreement to rent the property to them.

3The respondent filed the Request on November 25, 2011, requesting disclosure of invoices for the cleaning products the applicants claim they purchased to clean the house in August 2009, invoices for electronic equipment installed in the house and a copy of Mr. Harris’ mechanics license. It is not entirely clear on the face of the Request, but it also appears that the respondent seeks disclosure of any records establishing the applicant contracted for utilities for the house.

4The applicant responded to the Request on December 2, 2011. The applicant resists the Request on the basis that the documents are not relevant to the issue of discrimination and the applicant did not retain the invoices for cleaning products.

5I agree that none of the requested particulars are relevant to the issue of whether the respondent refused to rent the house to the applicant because she was in receipt of social assistance. The Request to disclose invoices for electronic equipment installed in the house, Mr. Harris’ mechanics license and records establishing the applicant contracted for utilities for the house is denied.

6However, the applicant has claimed damages to compensate her for the expenses she allegedly incurred in materials to make the premises ready for her and her family to move in. Consequently, any evidence regarding these expenses is relevant regarding potential remedies and should be produced if it can be located.

7The Notice of Confirmation of Hearing, dated August 17, 2011, informed the parties that they must disclose and file the following: the documents they intend to rely upon, witness lists and a summary of each witness’ evidence by December 2, 2011 (Rules 16.2, 16.3, 17.1 and 17.2). As of the date of this Interim Decision, the Tribunal has received the documents the respondent intends to rely upon and a witness list and a summary of the respondent’s expected testimony. The Tribunal has not received, however, summaries of the expected testimony of the respondent’s other witnesses. The Tribunal has received a witness list and summaries of the expected testimony of the applicant’s witnesses. The Tribunal has received no documents from the applicant, including the aforementioned receipts from Home Depot and Fabricland.

8Accordingly, the respondent must immediately disclose and file a summary of the expected testimony for each of his witnesses and the applicant must immediately disclose and file copies of the documents upon which she intends to rely at the hearing, including any receipts and invoices she can locate for cleaning supplies and other materials purchased to make the house ready to move into. The parties are reminded that the Tribunal may refuse to admit into evidence any document not previously disclosed and filed and may refuse to allow the testimony of any witness for whom a witness statement has not been disclosed and filed, pursuant to Rules 16.4 and 17.4, respectively.