Conn v. Toronto Police Services Board, 2014 HRTO 1269

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Kyle Conn

Applicant

-and-

Toronto Police Services Board, Todd Murphy, William Hutchins and Grant Pritchard

Respondents

DECISION

Adjudicator: Mary Truemner

Date: August 27, 2014

Citation: 2014 HRTO 1269

Indexed as: Conn v. Toronto Police Services Board

1This is an Application under the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended. The Application is scheduled to be heard on September 10 and 11, 2014.

2On April 8, 2014, the Tribunal sent the parties a Notice of Hearing directing them to take certain steps in advance of the hearing. In particular, and among other things, the Notice of Hearing directed the parties to comply with Rules 16 and 17 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure by providing one another with copies of their arguably relevant documents within 21 days of the date of the Notice of Hearing; and by exchanging with one another and filing with the Tribunal the documents they intended to rely upon at the hearing, a list of their witnesses and a summary of their witnesses’ anticipated evidence by no later than July 28, 2014, (i.e. 45 days before the first scheduled day of hearing).

3The applicant did not provide the Tribunal with the materials required under Rules 16 and 17 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure by July 28, 2014.

4Accordingly, in a Case Assessment Direction (“CAD”), the Tribunal directed the applicant to provide the required materials to the respondents and the Tribunal by no later than August 9, 2014.

5In its CAD, the Tribunal warned the applicant that there were serious consequences for the case if he did not comply with the Tribunal’s directions. In particular, the Tribunal’s CAD contained the following directions to the applicant:

By no later than August 9, 2014, the applicant must deliver to the respondent and file with the Tribunal the documents he intends to rely upon at the hearing, a list of his witnesses and a brief statement describing what his witnesses will say when they testify. If the applicant has not complied with this direction by August 9, 2014, the Application may be dismissed as abandoned.

The applicant is reminded that he must also submit a witness statement for himself, assuming he intends to testify at the hearing. However, if the applicant only intends to testify about the facts already contained in his Application, it is sufficient for him to confirm this in writing by August 9, 2014.

If the applicant does not communicate with the Tribunal at all by August 9, 2014, his case may be dismissed as abandoned.

6The applicant did not file his documents by August 9, 2014, and the respondents requested that the Application be dismissed as abandoned, but the applicant wrote to the Tribunal indicating that he had problems obtaining representation as an explanation for not complying with the Tribunal’s direction, and indicating that he does not wish to abandon his Application. The Tribunal consequently issued another CAD on August 22, 2014, directing the applicant to file his documents on or before August 26, 2014, whether he obtains legal representation or not.

7It is now past the applicant’s deadline for complying with the Tribunal’s most recent directions and the applicant has not filed the required materials with the Tribunal, nor has he communicated with the Tribunal.

8In the circumstances, it appears that the applicant has abandoned the Application. Accordingly, the Application is dismissed as abandoned.

ORDER

9The Application is dismissed as abandoned and the September 10 and 11, 2014 hearing dates are cancelled.