HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Michael Preddie
Applicant
-and-
The Regional Municipality of Waterloo Police Services Board
Respondent
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Ena Chadha
Indexed as: Preddie v. The Regional Municipality of Waterloo Police Services Board
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
The Regional Municipality of Waterloo ) Gary V. Melanson, Counsel Police Services Board, Respondent )
1The applicant filed this Application on September 20, 2012 under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), alleging discrimination and reprisal with respect to services, goods and facilities on the basis of race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, ethnic origin and creed. The applicant identifies as Aboriginal. The applicant alleges that, during the course of conducting a search of his residence, police officers came across his eagle feather. The applicant alleges that the police took his eagle feather.
2The respondent filed a Response on March 21, 2013 denying that its police officers engaged in any discriminatory conduct. The respondent also clarified that it has been incorrectly named in the Application and that its proper name is “The Regional Municipality of Waterloo Police Services Board”. The respondent requests that the Application be deferred on the basis that there are other legal proceedings that are currently outstanding. The respondent requests that the Application be deferred pending the completion of 1.) related criminal proceedings involving third parties and/or 2.) public complaints with the Office of the Independent Police Review Director (“OIPRD”). The respondent also notes that, subject to the outcome of the OIPRD process, it may also seek dismissal pursuant to section 45.1 of the Code.
3The applicant did not file a Reply or submissions in response to the request to defer.
DECISION
4The Tribunal may defer consideration of an Application on such terms as it may determine, on its own initiative or at the request of a party (Rule 14.1). Deferral of an Application seeks to ensure that proceedings dealing with the same facts or issues do not run concurrently, thereby raising the possibility of inconsistent decisions on facts or law.
5The Tribunal will consider, in light of the particular circumstances of each case, whether deferral is the most fair, just and expeditious way of proceeding with the Application. The Tribunal will generally defer an application where the parties are engaged in other legal proceedings raising similar facts and issues, particularly where the other decision-maker has the authority to make determinations and provide remedies with respect to facts that parallel the Application: see Aganeh Estate v. Mental Health Care Penetanguishene, 2011 HRTO 2280.
6Some factors that have been identified as relevant in deciding whether to defer consideration of an application before the Tribunal are: the subject matter of the other proceeding, the nature of the other proceeding, the types 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. See Baghdasserians v. 674469 Ontario, 2008 HRTO 404.
7The respondent asks that the Application be deferred pending the completion of the criminal proceedings in relation to third parties. The respondent explains that the search warrant of the applicant’s residence was issued and the search conducted following the arrests of the third parties. The respondent indicates that deferral of this Application is necessary to avoid prejudice to those prosecutions and to avoid any duplication or contradictory findings of law or fact. In the alternative vis-à-vis the criminal matter, the respondent indicates the Tribunal process could proceed if the Tribunal restricts this Application to the actual events of the search and not the events leading up to and the grounds for the search. The respondent points out that the background information leading to the search warrant is subject to a sealing order pursuant to the Criminal Code.
8The respondent has not provided any information as to the current status of the criminal proceedings. Given that the respondent anticipates that there may be alternate ways of ameliorating the concerns regarding potential prejudice and duplication, I find that these matters can be addressed by the adjudicator hearing the Application and that it is not necessary to defer this Application based on the criminal proceedings.
9With respect to the OIPRD process, I note that the Tribunal has deferred applications where there are on-going public complaints under the Police Services Act: see, for example, Leong v. Regional Municipality of Peel Police Services Board, 2010 HRTO 400, Tize v. Taylor, 2010 HRTO 747 and Riad v. Regional Municipality of Waterloo Police Services Board, 2010 HRTO 1807.
10I find that it is appropriate to defer the Application pending completion of the OIPRD proceeding. Based on the information provided by the respondent, it appears that the applicant has filed multiple complaints with the OIPRD regarding the exact same events and concerns as alleged in this Application. The OIPRD has retained authority to investigate the applicant’s complaint. Disclosure of documents has occurred and the OPIRD investigation is underway. As such, I find that there is substantial overlap between the facts raised in the Application and OIPRD complaint and it appears that the OIPRD process is actively underway.
11Accordingly, the Tribunal orders that the Application is deferred pending the completion of the OIPRD process.
ORDER
12The style of cause is amended to reflect the respondent’s proper name.
13The Application is deferred. Where a party wishes to proceed with an application which has been deferred, the party must make a Request for an Order During Proceedings in accordance with Rule 19 within 60 days after the conclusion of the other proceeding (Rules 14.3 and 14.4).
14I am not seized.
Dated at Toronto, this 18th day of April, 2013.
”signed by”
Ena Chadha
Vice-chair