Bishop v. Hamilton Entertainment and Convention Facilities, 2012 HRTO 29

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Richard-Benjamin Bishop

Applicant

-and-

Hamilton Entertainment and Convention Facilities Corporation, The Corporation for the City of Hamilton and Collectrite-Hamilton Ltd.

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Ian R. Mackenzie

Date: January 6, 2012

Citation: 2012 HRTO 29

Indexed as: Bishop v. Hamilton Entertainment and Convention Facilities

1Richard-Benjamin Bishop filed an Application under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended (the "Code"), alleging discrimination in services on the basis of disability. A summary hearing was ordered by the Tribunal to determine if the Application had a reasonable prospect of success and whether it should be dismissed in accordance with section 45.1 of the Code.

2The teleconference hearing was scheduled for October 20, 2011. The applicant did not attend the teleconference hearing. I heard submissions of the respondents on the issue of whether the Application should be dismissed on the basis that another proceeding had dealt with the substance of the Application (section 45.1 of the Code).

3On October 21, 2011, the applicant advised the Tribunal that he had technical difficulties with dialing into the teleconference call. Although he requested a re-hearing, he did not copy his request to the respondents, as required by the Tribunal's Rules. He was reminded of this obligation by Tribunal staff in an email dated November 9, 2011. He did not comply with the requirement to copy the respondents on his request.

4I issued a Case Assessment Direction ("CAD") on December 13, 2011, advising the applicant that if he did not copy the respondents on a request for a re-hearing, the Application may be dismissed.

5On December 19, 2011, the applicant sent his request for a re-hearing to the Tribunal, and copied the respondents.

6In the absence of any bad faith, I conclude that it is appropriate to order the re-hearing of the summary hearing. The instructions in the CAD issued on May 11, 2011 will apply to the re-hearing. No further written submissions by the parties will be permitted.

ORDER

7A re-hearing of this Application by way of teleconference call is ordered.

8The Registrar will contact the parties to determine a date for the re-hearing.

9I am not seized.