HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Naresh Somaroo
Applicant
-and-
P & F Tool and Die, a division of Magna International Inc. and Warren Peters
Respondent
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Douglas Sanderson
Indexed as: Somaroo v. P & F Tool and Die, a division of Magna International Inc.
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
P & F Tool and Die, a division of Magna International Inc. and Warren Peters, Respondent
Eric Gresham, 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 because of disability. The hearing of this matter is scheduled for April 2 and 3, 2013.
2This Interim Decision addresses the respondents’ request to adjourn the hearing. The respondents filed two letters with the Tribunal on March 25, 2013 in support of the request. In the first letter, the respondents advised that one of their key witnesses, Daniela Noethe, was required to travel overseas on short notice because her father is critically ill and expected to die shortly. As a result, Ms. Noethe will not be available to attend the hearing as currently scheduled; therefore, the respondents requested a brief adjournment to allow her to testify. The respondents noted that they had not been able to contact the applicant to ascertain his position regarding the adjournment request at that point. In the second letter, the respondents advised that they had been able to discuss the adjournment request with the applicant, but the applicant opposed the request. The respondents submitted that the adjournment request raises issues of accommodation based on Ms. Noethe’s family status and that, in the circumstances, the organizational respondent was obliged to allow her to attend to her family responsibilities.
DECISION
3The Tribunal’s Practice Direction on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests and Requests for Adjournments provides that requests to reschedule must be made within 14 days of receiving the Confirmation of Hearing and that outside that time adjournments will be granted only in extraordinary circumstances. The circumstances facing Ms. Noethe are certainly extraordinary and very unfortunate, but adjourning the hearing is not necessary to accommodate her. Rather, the hearing shall proceed on April 2 and 3, 2013, at which time the applicant shall present his evidence and the respondents shall present the other witnesses identified in their witness statements. The Tribunal shall then adjourn the hearing until a date when Ms. Noethe is available.
4The request to adjourn the hearing is denied; the hearing shall proceed as scheduled.
Dated at Toronto, this 26th day of March 2013.
“Signed by”
Douglas Sanderson
Vice-chair