Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
Between:
Ruby Crisostomo Applicant
-and-
The Ottawa Hospital, Marilyn Kendal, Julie Mckechnie and Heather Sherrard Respondents
Interim Decision
Adjudicator: Geneviève Debané Date: September 27, 2013 Citation: 2013 HRTO 1627 Indexed as: Crisostomo v. The Ottawa Hospital
Written Submissions
Ruby Crisostomo, 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 employment. This Application has not yet been delivered to the respondents.
2On August 15, 2013, the Tribunal issued to the applicant a Notice of Intent to Dismiss because it appeared that the Application was not within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. On September 12, 2013, the applicant filed detailed submissions in support of her Application.
3The Tribunal will only dismiss an Application at this stage if it is plain and obvious that the subject-matter of the Application is not within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. Having reviewed these materials it is not plain and obvious that the Application falls outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction and I decline to dismiss it at this stage. The Tribunal will continue to process the Application. This is not a final decision in respect of the Tribunal's jurisdiction over this matter.
4In her submissions the applicant requests that the Tribunal defer the Application pending the conclusion an arbitration hearing. In light of the applicant's request the Tribunal will not require the respondents to file Responses until the issue of deferral has been addressed by the parties.
Orders
5The Tribunal orders:
a. As provided for in Rule 13.5, the Application and the materials in the Tribunal's file, together with this Interim Decision will now be delivered to the respondents and any affected party;
b. The respondents are not required to file Responses at this time and until directed to do so by the Tribunal; and
c. Within 21 days of the receipt of the materials identified at paragraph 5(a) the respondents must file submissions on whether it is appropriate for the Tribunal to defer the Application. The respondents should include copies of any outstanding grievances and advise as to the current status of the arbitration hearing.
6I am not seized.
Dated at Toronto, this 27th day of September, 2013.
"Signed by"
Geneviève Debané Vice-chair