Philip Berger on behalf of Tracy Thacher v. The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, 2012 HRTO 1086

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Philip Berger on behalf of Tracy Thacher

Applicant

-and-

The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Judith Keene

Date: May 31, 2012

Citation: 2012 HRTO 1086

Indexed as: Thacher v. The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario

1The applicant filed an Application under section 34 of the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended, (the “Code”) on March 25, 2010. The Application alleges discrimination in the operation of the respondent’s Methadone Maintenance Treatment Program. The respondents have filed a Response. This Interim Decision deals with a request by both parties to hold the Application in abeyance.

2The matter has proceeded to mediation. Both parties have written to the Tribunal, in letters dated May 14 and May 15, 2012. Both parties have indicated that there have been some changes to the Program. The applicant states the changes are such that some of the issues raised in the Application are now resolved. The applicant also states that the last major issue “will be resolved, in all likelihood”, when a new government program, (which the respondent confirms is underway) is introduced, that it is likely that the changes “may be successfully concluded within the next year”, and that the respondent has no direct control over the timing of the change.

3Both parties have agreed that it would be in the best interest of the parties and the public for the Application to be held in abeyance for one year until May 10, 2013, at which time the Tribunal would place the Application on the list for scheduling a hearing subject to any request to the Tribunal for an amended process. The parties agree that no such request would be made until after December 31, 2012.

4The applicant acknowledges that the Tribunal is committed to the expeditious resolution of Applications, and is generally not amenable to scheduling delays even on consent. The applicant requests a departure from the normal rule in view of the circumstances.

5In view of the clear progress toward settlement and the unusual circumstances of this case, I agree that it is appropriate for the Application to be placed in abeyance.

ORDER

6The Tribunal will hold this Application in abeyance until December 31, 2012. After December 31, 2012, either party may make a Request For an Order During Proceedings to request that the matter be brought forward for a hearing. If no such request is filed, the application will be placed in the queue for scheduling hearings on May 10, 2013.

7I am not seized of this matter.