Fernando v. Metro Toronto Convention Centre Corporation, 2014 HRTO 1140

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Lourdes Fernando

Applicant

-and-

Metro Toronto Convention Centre Corporation

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: David Muir

Decision Date: July 30, 2014

Citation: 2014 HRTO 1140

Indexed as: Fernando v. Metro Toronto Convention Centre Corporation

1The applicant filed this Application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), alleging discrimination in employment on the basis age, colour, ethnic origin, place of origin, race and sex.

2The hearing is scheduled to begin on October 29 and 30, 2014. On July 18, 2014, the applicant filed a Request for Order During Proceeding (“Request”) seeking to amend her remedial requests in the event that the respondent is found to have violated the Code. The applicant now seeks re-instatement to employment. The respondent opposes the Request.

3The Request is granted.

4Rule 1.7. of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure states:

In order to provide for a fair, just and expedition resolution of any matter before it the Tribunal may:

c) allow any filing to be amended.

5In determining requests to amend applications under s. 34 of the Code, the Tribunal generally considers the nature of the proposed amendments, the timing of the request, and prejudice to the respondent. See Dube v. Canadian Career College, 2008 HRTO 336, Wozenilek v. 7-Eleven Canada Inc., 2009 HRTO 926, and Dunford v. Holiday Ford Sales, 2009 HRTO 1563.

6The Tribunal has generally granted requests to amend remedy when requested to do so. See for example, Guzman v. Senton Incorporated, 2011 HRTO 1480, Marino v. Compuware Corporation of Canada, 2011 HRTO 1390, and Loney v. Combusco Enterprises, 2011 HRTO 1050. It has taken this approach because in most cases there is no prejudice to any other party in granting such requests. I note that while the Request was filed on July 18, 2014, the respondent was made aware prior to mediation that the applicant would be making this Request. In any case, at the end of the day it is for the Tribunal to determine what the appropriate remedy is and may on its own initiative seek the submissions of the parties with respect to remedies even if not sought by an applicant.

7The various issues raised by the respondent in opposing the Request can be addressed at the appropriate time at the hearing of this case.

8I am not seized of this case.