George Pyke v. Spring Garden Baptist Church, 2012 HRTO 1144

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

George Pyke

Applicant

-and-

Spring Garden Baptist Church, Geoffrey Moore, Judy Tranter, Gerd Fiebig, Wes Chapman, Marion Cameron

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Michelle Flaherty Date: June 11, 2012 Citation: 2012 HRTO 1144 Indexed as: Pyke v. Spring Garden Baptist Church

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

George Pyke, Applicant Cecil Norman, Representative

Spring Garden Baptist Church, Geoffrey Moore, Judy Tranter, Gerd Fiebig, Wes Chapman, Marion Cameron, Respondents James LeNoury, Counsel

1This is an Application filed under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"), alleging discrimination with respect to employment because of disability. In essence, the applicant states that the respondents discriminated against him by failing to accommodate his disability and because his disability was a factor in the respondents' decision to terminate his employment.

2The respondents have filed a Response in which they deny the allegations of discrimination. In the Response, they request the early dismissal of the Application based on a letter signed by the applicant, dated April 30, 2011. They also seek the removal of the personal respondents.

3The applicant has not filed a Reply and the time for doing so under the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure has elapsed.

4The applicant's letter of April 30, 2011 appears to confirm the terms of the termination of his employment. The letter does not contain release language and it is not clear from the letter or the parties' pleadings whether the letter represents a settlement agreement between the parties.

5In the circumstances, the Tribunal will schedule a half-day in-person preliminary hearing to hear submissions and, if necessary, evidence concerning only the following issue:

Should the Application be dismissed, in whole or in part, because it would be an abuse of process for it to proceed?

6The parties may wish to consult the Tribunal's decision in Messiah v. Snap-on Tools of Canada, 2010 HRTO 1151, available at www.canlii.org

7At least three weeks before the date of the preliminary hearing:

a. Any party wishing to rely on written materials not already filed with the Tribunal must deliver such documents or information to the other party and file them with the Registrar; and

b. Any party intending to present oral evidence (testimony) at the preliminary hearing must deliver to the other party and file with the Tribunal a detailed summary of each proposed witness' expected evidence.

8The mediation scheduled for July 16, 2012 is adjourned pending the Tribunal's determination of the preliminary issue.

9The Tribunal may address the respondents' Request for removal of the personal respondents following the preliminary hearing.

10I am not seized.