Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
B E T W E E N:
T.B. and J.B.S. and M.S.B. by their next friend T.B. Applicants
-and-
Halton District School Board and Halton Student Transportation Services Respondents
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: David A. Wright Date: February 22, 2013 Citation: 2013 HRTO 304 Indexed as: T.B. v. Halton District School Board
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
T.B., Applicant Self-represented
J.B.S. and M.S.B. by their next friend T.B., Applicants T.B., Next Friend
Halton District School Board and Halton Student Transportation Services, Respondents Robert G. Keel, Counsel
Introduction
1The applicant, T.B., is the mother of two children who attend elementary school in the Halton District School Board (“Board”). She has a permanent spinal cord injury that causes extensive pain and affects her mobility. The children receive bussing services from Halton Student Transportation Services (“HSTS”), a non-profit corporation that transports the Board’s students. Her children’s bus stop, which is at their nearby home school, is 690 metres from her home. The applicant states that due to her disabilities, she cannot consistently drop off and pick up her children from their bus stop. M., her daughter, who is in junior kindergarten, has not attended school this year, but instead has remained in daycare. J., her son, who is in grade two, has missed significant amounts of school because, according to T.B., she often cannot take him to the bus stop. She has asked that the bus stop closer to her house. The respondent’s policy is that it will only modify its bus services because of a child’s disability, not that of a parent. It has refused to stop near the applicants’ home.
2The Application, as filed, alleges that the refusal to pick up the children closer to home constitutes discrimination with respect to services because of disability against Ms. B., contrary to s. 1 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”). She also seeks to amend the claim to assert a violation of her children’s rights to freedom from discrimination with respect to services because of association with her, a person with a disability, contrary to ss. 1 and 12 of the Code.
3This Interim Decision addresses various Requests filed by the parties. The respondent has filed a Request for Summary Hearing. The applicant has filed two Requests for Order During Proceedings, a Request for Interim Remedy and a Request to Expedite.
REQUEST FOR SUMMARY HEARING
4The Request for Summary Hearing is denied, without reasons, pursuant to Rule 19A.5.
REQUEST TO AMEND
5In a Request for Order During proceedings filed February 7, 2013, T.B. seeks to amend her Application to include discrimination against her children, to add the negative impacts on her family and to seek additional remedies. In the respondents’ Response to Request