HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Jessica Larabee
Applicant
-and-
Briarlane Rental Property Management Inc.
Respondent
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Ruth Carey
Indexed as: Larabee v. Briarlane Rental Property Management Inc.
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Jessica Larabee, Applicant
Self-represented
1This is an Application filed under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), alleging discrimination with respect to housing because of disability and receipt of public assistance.
2On July 12, 2013, the applicant filed with the Tribunal a Request for Order during Proceedings seeking to amend her Application; and a Request to Expedite Proceedings. This Interim Decision addresses the applicant’s Requests.
The Request to Amend
3The Request to amend the Application is granted.
4The amendment to the Application the applicant seeks is to increase the remedy sought for monetary compensation from $10,000 to $25,000 and for payment of the award to be made to her therapist. The stated reason for requesting the amendment is that it reflects the true remedy the applicant is seeking. The respondent did not reply to the Request to amend the Application.
5Rule 1.7 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice states in part:
1.7. In order to provide for the fair, just and expeditious resolution of any matter before it the Tribunal may:
c) allow any filing to be amended;
6As the only amendment being sought is with respect to remedy, granting the amendment will not result in any prejudice to the respondent or delay the proceedings.
7Given the above factors, the applicant’s request to amend her Application is granted.
The Request to Expedite Proceedings
8The Request to Expedite Proceedings is denied.
9The stated reason provided by the applicant for the Request to Expedite Proceedings is that she needs financial compensation before the scheduled hearing date, and providing an earlier date would accommodate her disability. No further explanation is provided. The respondent did not respond to the applicant’s Request to Expedite Proceedings.
10On July 16, 2013, the Tribunal wrote to the applicant to inform her that her Request to Expedite Proceedings was incomplete in that it did not include the declaration required under Rule 21.2(b). Although the applicant replied to the Tribunal’s e-mail, she did not supply the requested declaration; rather, her reply was to ask how long the Tribunal’s decision would take.
11Rule 21.2 says:
21.2 A Request to Expedite an Application made under Rule 21.1 must include:
a) a detailed description of the requested changes to the Tribunal’s normal process, including timelines;
b) one or more declarations signed by persons with direct first-hand knowledge detailing all the facts upon which the Applicant relies in support of the request to expedite; and
c) submissions that explain:
i. why there are urgent circumstances that may affect the fair and just resolution of the merits of the Application if the Application proceeds in accordance with the Tribunal’s regular process;
ii. the harm that would result if the Request is denied; and,
iii. why the Application should be given priority for Tribunal resources over other matters.
12As the applicant does not explain how her financial need or her disability constitutes an urgent circumstance that may affect the fair and just resolution of the merits of the Application if the hearing proceeds as scheduled, the Request to Expedite Proceedings is denied.
ORDER
13For the foregoing reasons, I hereby make the following order:
a. The Application is amended to increase the remedy sought for monetary compensation from $10,000 to $25,000 and for payment of the award to be made to her therapist.
b. The Request to Expedite Proceedings is denied.
Dated at Toronto, this 16th day of August, 2013.
“Signed By”
Ruth Carey
Member