Francisco v. Toronto District School Board, 2012 HRTO 2308

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Stenio Francisco

Applicant

-and-

Toronto District School Board and Adrian Graham

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: David Muir

Date: December 7, 2012

Citation: 2012 HRTO 2308

Indexed as: Francisco v. Toronto District School Board

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Stenio Francisco, Applicant

Osborne Barnwell, Counsel

Toronto District School Board and Adrian Graham, Respondents

Wendy Lopez, 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 goods and services because of age, ancestry and race. The hearing of this case was scheduled to resume on December 10, 2012.

2On December 7, 2012, the applicant requested an adjournment of the case on the basis that his counsel has been required to appear in a matter before the Superior Court on Monday, December 10, 2012.

3The respondents do not consent.

4The Tribunal’s Practice Direction now provides that requests to reschedule must be made within ten days of receiving the Confirmation of Hearing and that thereafter, adjournments will be granted only in extraordinary circumstances. The Practice Direction states the following regarding requests for adjournments:

The HRTO discourages requests for adjournments outside the ten-day period to request rescheduling of a hearing, described above. Requests for adjournments, particularly at the last minute, are a significant impediment to fair and timely access to justice. Therefore, the HRTO will only grant adjournments in extraordinary circumstances such as illness of a party, witness or representative. Absent exceptional circumstances, the HRTO will not grant adjournments, even when all parties consent.

Where a party seeks to adjourn a previously scheduled mediation or hearing, they must contact the Registrar as soon as the need arises. They must contact the other parties to seek their consent, and to discuss alternative dates for the rescheduling of the mediation or hearing.

The party making the request should contact the Registrar and provide the exceptional circumstances supporting the request and any alternative agreed upon dates. Where the request is on short notice, the party must contact the Registrar by email or fax, copied to the other parties.

The HRTO typically will not adjourn a hearing date because the parties wish to “engage in settlement discussions” or are “close to a deal.” The HRTO encourages mediation and settlements, and will assist the parties in this regard. Where parties believe they may be able to resolve a matter shortly before the scheduled hearing, they should advise the Registrar and the HRTO may make a mediator and mediation room available. The parties may also request mediation/adjudication in accordance with Rule 15.2.1 (and Rule 8.5 for s. 53(3) and 53(5) applications). However, the HRTO discourages the cancellation or adjournment of hearing dates so that the parties can explore settlement

5The reason for this request does constitute an exceptional circumstance that would justify an adjournment. Accordingly the adjournment request is granted on the following terms:

The applicant will consult with the respondent and propose five dates amongst the following which the Tribunal has available for this matter, within seven days of the date of this Interim Decision:

• January 30, 31;

• February 1, 11, 14, 15;

• April 2-5; 8-12 or 15-119, 2013.

6I am seized of this case