HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Frank Nyitray
Applicant
-and-
Ryerson University Students’ Union, Canadian Federation of Students, Denise Hammond and Toby Whitfield
Respondents
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Douglas Sanderson
Indexed as: Nyitray v. Ryerson University Students Union
wRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Frank Nyitray, Applicant ) Self-represented
Ryerson University Students’ Union, ) Canadian Federation of Student, ) Michael S. Richards, Counsel Denise Hammond and Toby Whitfield, ) Respondents )
1The applicant filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), on April 26, 2010, which alleges discrimination with respect to services, goods and facilities and employment on the basis of disability, age, association and reprisal.
2The application alleges a variety of discriminatory acts by the respondents when he was an employee of the Ryerson Students’ Union (“RSU”) and on occasions when he sought to participate in events organized by the organizational respondents. The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss the Application (“NOID”) on November 12, 2010 because the allegations regarding several named respondents appeared to be outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. The applicant filed submissions replying to the NOID on December 15, 2010. In an Interim Decision, 2011 HRTO 445, the Tribunal dismissed the Application against five individual respondents.
3On October 2, 2011, the applicant filed a Request to Withdraw an Application against eight individual and two organizational respondents. Accordingly, the Application has been closed as against Ryerson Student Centre / Student Campus Center, Continuing Education Students’ Association of Ryerson, Palin Foundation, Gilary Massa, Jermaine Bagnall, Lise de Montburn, Rodney Diverlus, Eric Newstadt, Joel Duff, Chris McNeil and Sean Carson. The application will continue to be processed against the remaining respondents RSU, the Canadian Federation of Students (“CFS”), Denise Hammond (“Hammond”) and Toby Whitfield (“Whitfield”).
4The purpose of this Interim Decision is to deal with several preliminary issues raised by the respondents. On May 4, 2011, each of the remaining respondents filed a Response. In addition to denying any violation of the Code, the respondents made several preliminary and procedural submissions, as follows:
Each of the respondents submitted that the majority of the allegations set out in the Application are untimely, pursuant to section 34(1) of the Code;
Hammond and Whitfield submitted that the Tribunal should remove each of them as individual respondents;
Each respondent submitted that a claim based on the same facts has been commenced in two civil actions in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice; therefore, the Tribunal should dismiss or defer the Application, pursuant to sections 34(11) and 45.1 of the Code, respectively;
The individual respondents, Hammond and Whitfield submit that the substance of the Application has been dealt with in separate proceedings: a complaint to the Ministry of Labour and Small Claims Court actions. They note that the Small Claims Court matters were settled and the applicant executed releases in favour of Hammond and Whitfield. Hammond, Whitfield and the RSU submitted the releases also bar the applicant from proceeding with the Application against them.
DECISION
5In my view, a preliminary hearing is the most fair, just and expeditious manner to address these issues.
ORDER
6The Tribunal orders as follows:
The Registrar will schedule a one-day preliminary hearing in person. The respondents shall proceed first regarding whether the Application should be dismissed or deferred, pursuant to sections 34(11), 45 and 45.1 of the Code and whether the releases executed by the applicant bar him from proceeding with this Application. The respondents shall also proceed first regarding whether Hammond and Whitfield should continue as individual respondents to the Application. The parties should also be prepared to make submissions regarding whether the releases render the Application an abuse of process. The applicant shall proceed first regarding the timeliness issue and the parties should be prepared to address whether the delay was incurred in good faith and, if so, whether the delay results in substantial prejudice to the respondents. .
7The style of cause is amended to remove Ryerson Student Centre / Student Campus Center, Continuing Education Students’ Association of Ryerson, Palin Foundation, Gilary Massa, Jermaine Bagnall, Lise de Montburn, Rodney Diverlus, Eric Newstadt, Joel Duff, Chris McNeil and Sean Carson.
8A Notice of Preliminary 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 hearing.
Dated at Toronto, this 26th day of March, 2012
“Signed by”
__________________________________
Douglas Sanderson
Vice-chair