HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Joel Thibodeau
Applicant
-and-
CS Wind Canada Inc.
Respondent
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Geneviève Debané
Indexed as: Thibodeau v. CS Wind Canada Inc.
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Joel Thibodeau, Applicant
Shawn Weston, Representative
CS Wind Canada Inc., Respondent
Michael Wills, Counsel
1This matter is scheduled for a hearing in Windsor on November 17 and 18, 2014. The Notice of Hearing was sent to the parties on May 22, 2014.
2On August 7, 2014, the respondent made a request to adjourn the hearing because two of its witnesses have to attend a company event out of town.
3The applicant opposes the adjournment request.
DECISION
4The Practice Direction on requests to adjourn or reschedule reads as follows:
The HRTO discourages requests for adjournments outside the 14-day period to request rescheduling of a 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.
5In Vallentyne v. Royal Canadian Legion, 2009 HRTO 660, at para. 4, the Tribunal explained why, even when there is consent, an adjournment of a scheduled hearing will not be granted absent exceptional circumstances:
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.
6I find that there are no exceptional circumstances that warrant the adjournment of the hearing. The matter is presently scheduled for two days of hearing and I am of the view that it is unlikely, based on the length of the pleadings, that the evidence in this matter shall be concluded during this time. The applicant must present his case first. In the event that the applicant’s case is finished the respondent can call some of its other witnesses. Therefore, the respondent’s two witnesses can still attend their business trip and an adjournment of the hearing is unnecessary. In any event, it is likely that the Tribunal may order the exclusion of the witnesses during the course of the hearing and these witnesses would not be allowed to be present during the hearing.
7The parties are reminded that they have to deliver to each other and file with the Tribunal their witness lists, witness statements and documents that they intend to rely on at the hearing by no later than October 3, 2014.
8I am not seized.
Dated at Toronto, this 28th day of August, 2014.
“signed by”
Geneviève Debané
Vice-chair