HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Lori Warren
Applicant
-and-
Windsor Casino Limited
Respondent
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Jay Sengupta
Indexed as: Warren v. Windsor Casino Limited
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 by the applicant to amend her Application and a request by the respondent that the Application be dismissed pursuant to s. 45.1 because a related grievance proceeding has appropriately dealt with the substance of the matters before the Tribunal.
APPLICANT’S REQUEST TO AMEND APPLICATION
2The applicant has filed a Request for Order seeking to amend her Application. Specifically, she requests an order permitting her to amend the remedies she seeks if she is able to establish a breach of the Code. The respondent consents to her request.
3In view of the stage at which this request has been made, the nature of the amendments, the absence of any apparent prejudice and the respondent’s consent, I see no reason to deny the amendments. I order that the Application be amended accordingly.
RESPONDENT’S REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL UNDER S. 45.1
4The respondent argues that the substance of the Application may have been appropriately dealt with, in whole or in part, in a grievance filed on the applicant’s behalf by her union and there is an issue of whether the Application should be dismissed in whole or in part pursuant to s. 45.1 of the Code, which reads as follows:
The Tribunal may dismiss an application, in whole or in part, in accordance with its rules if the Tribunal is of the opinion that another proceeding has appropriately dealt with the substance of the application.
5The applicant may wish to refer to the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Board) v. Figliola, 2011 SCC 52, and the Tribunal’s decision in Gomez v. Sobeys Milton Retail Support Centre, 2011 HRTO 2297.
6The Tribunal’s Registrar will schedule a half-day hearing by teleconference. The parties shall make argument about whether the Application should be dismissed pursuant to s. 45.1 of the Code.
7A Notice of Hearing will follow from the Registrar’s Office. The parties shall deliver to each other and file with the Tribunal copies of any further documents or cases they intend to rely upon no later than 14 days prior to the teleconference.
8The Registrar will schedule a half-day hearing by conference call on the issue of whether the Application should be dismissed pursuant to s. 45.1. The parties shall deliver to each other and file with the Tribunal copies of any further documents or cases they intend to rely upon no later than 14 days prior to the teleconference.
9I am not seized.
Dated at Toronto, this 24th day of October, 2012.
“Signed by”
Jay Sengupta
Vice-chair