HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Alessio Camilli
Applicant
-and-
The Regional Municipality of York and Shelly Ayres
Respondents
Interim DecisioN
Adjudicator: David Muir
Indexed as: Camilli v. York Region
1This is an Application filed pursuant to section 34 Part IV of the Ontario Human Rights Code R.S.O 1990 c. H.9 as amended (the “Code”). This Interim Decision relates to an adjournment request that is not opposed by the respondents.
2The Notice of Confirmation of Hearing (Notice) establishing the hearing dates of May 2 and 3, 2012 for this case was sent to the parties on December 12, 2011. The Notice advised as follows:
If you are unable to attend the hearing on the date(s) scheduled, you need to act quickly to arrange for rescheduling.
You are strongly encouraged to agree on mutually available dates that are within 12 weeks of the original hearing date(s). If the parties are able to agree on alternative dates, one party must advise the HRTO Registrar in writing within 14 days of the Notice of Confirmation of Hearing. The HRTO will make every effort to schedule the hearing for dates provided by the parties.
If the parties are unable to agree on alternative dates, the party asking that the hearing be rescheduled must contact the HRTO Registrar in writing, copied to the other parties, and provide five alternative dates (or blocks of dates if the hearing is scheduled for multiple days) that are within 12 weeks of the originally scheduled hearing date(s). This must be done within 14 days of the date of the Notice of Confirmation of Hearing. The HRTO will contact the other parties to try to find mutually agreeable dates. If, after a reasonable number of attempts, the parties are unable to agree on dates, the HRTO will set the dates for the hearing without agreement of the parties.
Please remember to provide copies to the other parties of anything you send to the HRTO Registrar.
If this hearing date was scheduled after consultation with the parties the HRTO will only adjourn or reschedule the hearing in exceptional circumstances.
If this hearing date was scheduled after consultation with the parties the HRTO will only adjourn or reschedule the hearing in exceptional circumstances.
3A prior Notice establishing hearing dates for this case was sent to the parties on December 1, 2011. Counsel for the respondents wrote to the Tribunal in accordance with the directions above and advised the Tribunal that both parties were available on any date between April 30 and May 11, 2012. Accordingly the December 12, 2011 Notice was sent to the parties.
4On April 3, 2012 the counsel for the applicant wrote to the Tribunal asking for an adjournment of the dates set for this hearing citing a conflict with the dates. No further specifics are provided. As indicated the respondents do not oppose the request.
5The Tribunal’s Practice Direction on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests, and Requests for Adjournments provides in part as follows:
The HRTO discourages requests for adjournments outside the 14-day period to request rescheduling of a mediation or 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.
6I am not satisfied that it would be fair, just or expeditious to grant this adjournment request. As indicated above these dates were set in December 2012. The applicant appears to have indicated that he was available at that time. The only reasons cited for the request is a “conflict”. It is not stated what the conflict is, whether the conflict is with both scheduled dates, nor is it stated why someone else at counsel’s firm cannot handle the matter. I am not satisfied that these are extraordinary or exceptional circumstances as contemplated by the Tribunal’s Practice Direction. For all of these reasons the request to adjourn is denied at this stage.
7I am not seized of this case.
Dated at Toronto, this 11th day of April, 2012.
‘Signed by”
David Muir
Vice-chair