HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Greg Kirk Applicant

-and-

Convoy Supply Ltd Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Ena Chadha Date: February 16, 2011 Citation: 2011 HRTO 346 Indexed as: Kirk v. Convoy Supply

1The applicant filed this Application on October 8, 2010, 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 applicant suffered an injury due to a workplace accident on October 8, 2009 and the applicant’s employment was terminated on October 26, 2009. The applicant alleges that he was dismissed for reporting his injury and accident. The Application indicates that a Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (“WSIB”) claim regarding the subject matter of the Application is in progress.

3On November 10, 2010, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer pending the resolution of another legal proceeding, a WSIB claim, dealing with the subject matter of the Application pursuant to Rule 14 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure. The Tribunal invited the parties to file submissions no later than 30 days from the date of the Notice as to why consideration of the Application should or should not be deferred.

4The respondent wrote the Tribunal on December 9, 2010 and indicated that it agrees the Application should be deferred.

5The applicant wrote to the Tribunal on December 10, 2010 and January 14, 2011. The applicant indicates that the WSIB claim does not deal with the applicant’s employment termination or his right to reinstatement.

DECISION

6The 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.

7Some 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.

8In the present case, while the factual background to the Application overlaps with the WSIB proceeding, it appears, based on the applicant’s submissions, that the human rights substance of the Application and specifically the allegations of discriminatory dismissal, are not the subject of the WSIB proceeding. In these circumstances, the Tribunal will not defer this Application.

9The Tribunal orders the respondent to file a Response (Form 2) within 35 days of the date of this Interim Decision and to specifically indicate in its Response whether or not the respondent is willing to participate in mediation.

10I am not seized of this matter.

Dated at Toronto, this 16^th^ day of February, 2011.