Janet Ellen Bruce v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services, 2012 HRTO 364

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Janet Ellen Bruce

Applicant

-and-

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services

Respondent

interim decision

Adjudicator: Keith Brennenstuhl

Date: February 21, 2012

Citation: 2012 HRTO 364

Indexed as: Bruce v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services)

1A Summary Hearing in this matter is scheduled for February 22, 2012 commencing at 1:30 p.m. On February 17, 2012 the parties requested that it be adjourned so that the parties could consider whether it would be appropriate to defer the Application to a civil proceeding.

2The request for an adjournment is denied. The 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 (5) days of receiving the Confirmation of Hearing and that thereafter, adjournments will be granted only in extraordinary circumstances.

3In Vallentyne v. Royal Canadian Legion, 2009 HRTO 660 at para. 4, the Tribunal held:

The Tribunal is committed to the fair, just and expeditious resolution of proceedings before it. It expects to receive thousands of applications each year. The Tribunal has a responsibility to ensure that public resources are used effectively to meet the demands of all parties before the Tribunal. Therefore, when an adjournment request is made, it is not only the interests of the parties to the particular proceeding must consider, but the fact that Tribunal time reserved for the resolution of those parties’ dispute will no longer be used. For that reason, among others, the Tribunal’s Information Bulletin on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests and Requests for Adjournments indicates that even adjournment requests made on consent of the parties more than five days after the hearing is scheduled may be denied. The Tribunal has balanced the interests of parties in having hearings scheduled according to their and counsel’s availability with these broader interests by requiring that a party advise within five days that they are unavailable, and providing that requests for adjournment will not otherwise be granted, absent exceptional circumstances.

4The parties were notified of the summary hearing in this matter on December 8, 2011. The request for an adjournment is made well beyond five days after the notice of the summary hearing. It is not clear why the parties cannot complete their deliberations prior to the date of the summary hearing. In my view, the request for adjournment cites no exceptional circumstances that justify an adjournment in accordance with the Tribunal’s policies and jurisprudence.

5The request for adjournment is denied.