HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Beth Pimm
Applicant
-and-
Her Majesty in right of Ontario, as represented by the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services, Ontario Provincial Police, Cathy MacVittie and Dave Lee
Respondents
The Ontario Provincial Police Association
Intervenor
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Geneviève Debané
Indexed as: Pimm v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services)
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Beth Pimm, Applicant
Self-represented
Her Majesty in right of Ontario, as represented by the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services, Ontario Provincial Police, Cathy MacVittie and Dave Lee, Respondents
Marnie Bacher, Counsel
Ontario Provincial Police Association, Intervenor
Michele Hamilton Meyers, Counsel
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 employment.
2This Interim Decision deals with some procedural issues.
Request to Intervene
3The Ontario Provincial Police Association, which is the applicant’s bargaining agent, has filed a Request to Intervene.
4In the response to the Request to Intervene, the respondents state that they do not oppose the Association’s right to intervene, however, they take the position that the extent of its participatory rights should be determined by the adjudicator assigned to hear the matter.
5In Boyce v. Toronto Community Housing Corporation, 2009 HRTO 131, the Tribunal found that absent exceptional circumstances, the applicant’s bargaining agent will be granted intervenor status in Tribunal proceedings where it requests it.
6I find that it is appropriate to grant the Association’s Request to Intervene. However, having reviewed the Request to Intervene, which contains no particulars of the Association’s position I agree that it is appropriate for the adjudicator assigned to hear the case to determine the extent of the Association’s participatory rights at the hearing.
Request to Dismiss part of the Application
7The respondents seek the dismissal of part of the allegations in the Application pursuant to section 45.1 because the applicant entered into Minutes of Settlement of a previous Application. Alternatively, the respondents seek the dismissal of these allegations because they are an abuse of process.
8The applicant opposes this request on the basis that some of the allegations form part of the factual background, and that further they are not covered by the Minutes of Settlement.
9Having considered the matter, I find that it would not be efficient for the Tribunal to hear the section 45.1 and abuse of process requests at this time, since it would result in the dismissal of a very limited part of the Application. The determination of these requests is best left to be determined by the adjudicator assigned to hear the matter.
Order
10The Tribunal orders:
a. The Ontario Provincial Police Association’s Request to Intervene is granted and the style of cause shall be immediately amended to reflect this change; and
b. The extent of the Ontario Provincial Police Association’s participatory rights at the hearing shall be determined by the adjudicator assigned to hear the matter.
11The Tribunal will contact the parties to schedule a three day hearing in London.
12I am not seized.
Dated at Toronto, this 26^th^ day of September, 2014.
“Signed By”
Geneviève Debané
Vice-chair