Lee v. Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, 2012 HRTO 682

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Robert Lee

Applicant

-and-

Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board and Canadian Union of Public Employees

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Sheri D. Price

Date: April 3, 2012

Citation: 2012 HRTO 682

Indexed as: Lee v. Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board

1In this Application under s.34 of the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), the applicant alleges that the respondents infringed his rights under the Code.

2A summary hearing to determine whether the Application has any reasonable prospect of success has been scheduled to take place on April 20, 2012. The summary hearing is scheduled to proceed by way of teleconference.

3By letter dated March 25, 2012, the applicant requests that the April 20, 2012 summary hearing date be adjourned on the basis of “personal reasons”. Specifically, the applicant states that he will not be home and will not be available to participate in the summary hearing on April 20, 2012. In addition, the applicant submits that he has no lawyer to represent him at the summary hearing because he cannot afford one.

4According to the Tribunal’s “Practice Direction on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests, and Requests for Adjournments”, requests for adjournments which are made outside the ordinary time limit for rescheduling requests, as this one is, will only be granted in extraordinary circumstances. The onus of establishing that extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant an adjournment rests on the party seeking the adjournment.

5The applicant’s mere assertion that he will not be available to participate in the summary hearing by teleconference on April 20, 2012 is not sufficient to establish that extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant the adjournment of the summary hearing. There is nothing in the applicant’s request to indicate that the applicant is unable, for legitimate reasons, to participate in the summary hearing as scheduled. Nor is the fact that the applicant cannot afford legal representation a basis upon which to adjourn the hearing. Moreover, there is no reason to conclude that the applicant’s ability to retain legal counsel would be affected in any way by an adjournment of the hearing.

6The applicant has not established that there are extraordinary circumstances in this case that warrant the adjournment of the summary hearing. The hearing will proceed as scheduled on April 20, 2012.