HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Michael Jack
Applicant
-and-
Her Majesty the Queen as represented by the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services operating as the Ontario Provincial Police
Respondent
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Keith Brennenstuhl
Indexed as: Jack v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services)
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Michael Jack, Applicant
Lloyd Tapp, Representative
Her Majesty the Queen as represented by the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services operating as the Ontario Provincial Police, Respondent
Lynette D’Souza, Counsel
1The Applicant has made a Request seeking the deferral of the Application to a civil claim recently filed by the applicant as against the respondent, among others, with the Ontario Court of Justice.
2The applicant submits that the Application should be deferred until the Court has determined whether the applicant’s statement of claim can proceed through the civil courts.
3Deferral of an application ensures that proceedings dealing with the same issues do not run concurrently, thereby raising the possibility of inconsistent decisions on the facts or law.
4Some of the factors that may be relevant in deciding whether to defer consideration of an application are the subject matter of the other proceeding, the nature of the other proceeding, the type of remedies available in the other proceeding, and whether it would be fair overall to the parties to defer, having regard to the status of each proceeding and the steps that have been taken to pursue them.
5In this case the statement of claim before the Court raises the same circumstances that gave rise to the Application. It would appear that there is a significant overlap between the issues addressed in the Statement of Claim and the issues that the Tribunal would likely deal with in considering the Application.
6The respondent has agreed to the deferral. In these circumstances, I find that it is appropriate for the Tribunal to defer further consideration of the Application.
7The applicant has indicated that he will withdraw the Application should the Court allow the statement of claim to proceed through the civil courts.
8The Tribunal directs the parties’ attention to Rules 14.3 and 14.4 which outline the process by which the Application may be brought back on before the Tribunal after the Court has determined whether the statement of claim may proceed through the civil courts.
9The respondent seeks an order for the dismissal of the Application on the basis that, amongst others, the contents of the statement of claim amount to an abuse of the Tribunal’s process. The Tribunal may address this matter if the Application is brought back on before the Tribunal.
Dated at Toronto, this 19th day of February, 2013.
”signed by”
Keith Brennenstuhl
Vice-chair