Wozenilek v. Heller & Moisan Shoes Inc., 2012 HRTO 1968

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Matthew Wozenilek

Applicant

-and-

Heller & Moisan Shoes Inc.

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Jay Sengupta

Date: October 17, 2012

Citation: 2012 HRTO 1968

Indexed as: Wozenilek v. Heller & Moisan Shoes Inc.

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Matthew Wozenilek, Applicant

Self-represented

Heller & Moisan Shoes Inc., Respondent

Charles Davidson, Counsel

Introduction

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”). The purpose of this Interim Decision is to deal with a request that the scheduled hearing date be cancelled and a hearing be scheduled after March 2013.

2The hearing into this Application was scheduled to be held on October 12, 2012. On consent of the parties, due to illness of counsel for the respondent, the October hearing date was cancelled. The parties were canvassed for alternate dates and a hearing scheduled for December 10, 2012, a date agreed to by both parties.

3On September 24, 2012, the contact person for the respondent company, although represented by counsel, filed a Request for Order during Proceedings (“RFOP”) on behalf of the respondent company, in which he sought an Order deferring the Application.

4Although there was some initial confusion as to who had made the request, the Tribunal sought and obtained the applicant’s position on the RFOP. In his response, the applicant refers to the Tribunal’s Information Bulletin on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests and Requests for Adjournments, points out that the hearing date has already been rescheduled at the request of the respondent and seeks an expeditious resolution of the Application.

5Although the Request is framed as a request for deferral, there is no other process to which this Application could or would be deferred. It appears that what the contact person for the respondent company actually seeks is to have the scheduled date adjourned and a new date set in or after March 2013. The reason for the request is a death of a close family member on September 16, 2012, and his obligations as executor of the estate of that family member.

6The Tribunal’s Information Bulletin on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests, and Requests for Adjournments provides that requests to reschedule must be made within five days of receiving the Notice of Hearing. The Information Bulletin states, in part, the following regarding requests for adjournment:

1. Requests for adjournment, particularly last minute requests for adjournments are a significant impediment to fair and timely access to justice.

2. The Tribunal’s approach to scheduling and rescheduling mediations and hearings is designed to give the parties a fair opportunity to find suitable dates. Therefore, the Tribunal discourages adjournment requests, and will only grant adjournments in extraordinary circumstances such as illness of a party, witness or representative.

3. The Tribunal will not automatically grant adjournments even when all parties consent. Consent of all parties will be a factor which the Tribunal will consider where a request to adjourn a mediation or hearing is made, but it is not the only, or even the main factor.

4. Where a party seeks to adjourn a previously scheduled mediation or hearing, they must contact the Registrar as soon as the need arises. If practical, they should contact the other parties to seek their consent, and to discuss alternative dates for the rescheduling of the mediation or hearing. Alternative dates for mediation must fall within five (5) months of the date of the Notice of Application. Alternative dates for a hearing must fall within five (5) months of the date of the Confirmation of Hearing.

5. The party making the request should contact the Registrar and provide the reason for the request and the alternative agreed upon dates. Where the request is on short notice, the party must contact the Registrar by telephone or email.

7While I am sympathetic to the respondent company’s contact person’s situation— the loss of a close family member in September and his obligations as executor of the estate— this does not constitute a sufficient basis to grant his request.

8The original hearing date was cancelled due to unavailability of counsel for the respondent for medical reasons. An alternate date was set after canvassing with the parties as to their availability. The alternate date is not in the immediate future and is scheduled for December 10, 2012.

9The respondent’s request is denied. The hearing will proceed on December 10, 2012.