Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
Between:
Faisal Hussain Applicant
-and-
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Community and Social Services and the Ontario Public Service Employees Union Respondents
Interim Decision
Adjudicator: Geneviève Debané Date: July 26, 2013 Citation: 2013 HRTO 1311 Indexed as: Hussain v. Ontario (Community and Social Services)
Written Submissions
Faisal Hussain, Applicant Ron Franklin, Counsel
Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Community and Social Services, Respondent Benjamin Parry, Counsel
Introduction
1This is an Application filed under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”).
2On May 4, 2011, the Registrar issued a letter to the parties confirming that the Application was being deferred on the consent of the parties.
3On April 19, 2013, the Grievance Settlement Board issued a decision with respect to the applicant’s grievance (the “Decision”).
4On June 10, 2013, 2012, the applicant wrote to the Tribunal seeking an extension of time to ask for the reactivation of the Application.
5On June 11, 2013, counsel for the respondent employer filed a copy of the Decision.
6On June 13, 2013, the applicant filed a Request to Reactivate the Application.
7On July 3, 2013 the employer respondent filed a Response opposing the applicant’s Request on the basis that the Application should be dismissed pursuant to section 45. 1 of the Code because another proceeding had appropriately dealt with the substance of the Application.
8On July 4, 2013, the applicant retained a representative and filed a Request for an Order During Proceeding seeking an extension to file further submissions on the issue of whether the Application should be reactivated. On July 18, 2013, counsel for the employer filed detailed submissions opposing this Request.
9The respondent Union has filed no submissions.
Proceeding with the Application
10It is not necessary for either party to file any further submissions on the issue of reactivating the Application. Therefore, it is not necessary for the Tribunal to address the applicant’s Request for an extension of time to file further submissions.
11The Tribunal has reviewed the materials filed by the parties and there is no dispute that the grievance process is concluded, that the Decision has been rendered and that the request to reactivate the Application is timely. Therefore, I find that it is appropriate for the Tribunal to proceed with the Application.
Section 45.1
12However, the Tribunal will first convene a telephone conference hearing to address the respondent employer’s Request to dismiss on the basis that the substance of the Application may have been appropriately dealt with, in whole or in part, by another proceeding and/or that it is an abuse of process for the applicant to proceed with the Application.
13S. 45.1 of the Code, states: “The Tribunal may dismiss an application, in whole or in part, in accordance with its rules if the Tribunal is of the opinion that another proceeding has appropriately dealt with the substance of the application”. The applicant may wish to refer to the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Board) v. Figliola, 2011 SCC 52, and the Tribunal’s decision in [Gomez v. Sobeys Milton Retail Support Centre, 2011 HRTO 2297](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onhrt