Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
B E T W E E N:
Donna Austen
Applicants
-and-
Senior Tours Canada Inc. and Tina Horley
Respondents
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: David A. Wright
Indexed as: Austen v. Senior Tours Canada Inc.
1This Interim Decision addresses the request by the respondents dated February 7, 2013 to adjourn the hearing, scheduled for May 16 and 17, 2013, on the basis that "the individual who is representing our company will be out of the country attending a family function" on the dates of the hearing. The applicant does not object to the adjournment.
2The hearing was scheduled on November 15, 2012. The Notice of Hearing stated that a party that could not attend the hearing must arrange for rescheduling within 14 days and noted that requests for adjournments would be dealt with in accordance with the Tribunal's Practice Direction on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests, and Requests for Adjournment ("Practice Direction") on the Tribunal's web site.
3The Practice Direction reads in relevant part as follows:
The HRTO discourages requests for adjournments outside the 14-day period to request rescheduling of a mediation or hearing, described above. Requests for adjournments, particularly at the last minute, are a significant impediment to fair and timely access to justice. Therefore, the HRTO will only grant adjournments in extraordinary circumstances such as illness of a party, witness or representative. Absent exceptional circumstances, the HRTO will not grant adjournments, even when all parties consent.
Where a party seeks to adjourn a previously scheduled mediation or hearing, they must contact the Registrar as soon as the need arises. They must contact the other parties to seek their consent, and to discuss alternative dates for the rescheduling of the mediation or hearing.
The party making the request should contact the Registrar and provide the exceptional circumstances supporting the request and any alternative agreed upon dates. Where the request is on short notice, the party must contact the Registrar by email or fax.
4In Vallentyne v. Royal Canadian Legion, 2009 HRTO 660 at para. 4, the Tribunal explained the reasons for this as follows:
The Tribunal is committed to the fair, just and expeditious resolution of proceedings before it. It expects to receive thousands of applications each year. The Tribunal has a responsibility to ensure that public resources are used effectively to meet the demands of all parties before the Tribunal. Therefore, when an adjournment request is made, it is not only the interests of the parties to the particular proceeding must consider, but the fact that Tribunal time reserved for the resolution of those parties' dispute will no longer be used. For that reason, among others, the Tribunal's Information Bulletin on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests and Requests for Adjournments indicates that even adjournment requests made on consent of the parties more than five days after the hearing is scheduled may be denied. The Tribunal has balanced the interests of parties in having hearings scheduled according to their and counsel's availability with these broader interests by requiring that a party advise within five [now 14] days that they are unavailable, and providing that requests for adjournment will not otherwise be granted, absent exceptional circumstances.
5The respondents have provided no reasons why the family function is an exceptional circumstance, why someone else cannot represent the respondent, or why rescheduling was not requested because of the family function when the Notice of Hearing was sent. Accordingly the Request for Adjournment is denied.
ORDER
6The adjournment request is denied. The hearing will proceed on May 16 and 17, 2013.
Dated at Toronto, this 5th day of March, 2013.
"Signed by"
David A. Wright
Associate Chair