HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Linda Race
Applicant
-and-
NNG, Ltd. (o/a Golf Supply House) and Paul Cherrie
Respondents
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Kathleen Martin
Indexed as: Race v. NNG, Ltd.
Choose an item.
Linda Race, Applicant
Michael Mazzuca, Counsel
NNG, Ltd. (o/a Golf Supply House) and Paul Cherrie, Respondents
Tatha Swann, Counsel
1This Application is scheduled for hearing on December 1 and 2, 2014, in Toronto. This Interim Decision addresses a request to adjourn the hearing brought by the respondents on October 21, 2014.
2The respondents’ counsel states that the lawyer with carriage of the respondents’ file at their firm has taken sick and is off indefinitely. Counsel submits that as a result they are not able to meet the timetable set out by the Tribunal for production of witness statements and relevant documents nor will they be in position to participate in the hearing. In addition to seeking an adjournment, counsel for the respondents seeks a new timetable for production of relevant documents and witness statements.
3The request for an adjournment and new timetable was made on the same date that the Tribunal addressed an earlier request of the respondents for an extension to file documents and witness statements. That request was granted and the deadline for filing was extended from October 17, 2014 to November 7, 2014.
4The applicant opposes the adjournment and the request for a further extension. The applicant submits that the hearing dates are six weeks away which permits ample time for another counsel at the firm to review the matter and prepare for hearing. The applicant notes that she has already secured the attendance of an expert witness for the scheduled dates and that to delay the hearing would prevent the applicant from obtaining the benefit of finality of the proceeding.
5For the reasons that follow, the request for an adjournment and a further extension to file documents and witness statements is denied.
6The Tribunal has made it clear that adjournments will only be granted in exceptional circumstances (See the Tribunal’s Practice Direction on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests, and Requests for Adjournments and Vallentyne v. Royal Canadian Legion, 2009 HRTO 660). While illness of a party, witness or representative may justify an adjournment when it occurs at the last minute, this is not the circumstance underlying this request.
7In this case, the law firm acting for the respondents is seeking what amounts to an indefinite adjournment and is making that request six weeks before the hearing. While I am sympathetic to counsel’s situation, the Tribunal does not have a practice of granting indefinite adjournments. Based on the information provided, it would appear that counsel who has had carriage of the matter is not in a position to continue acting for the foreseeable future. Based on the material filed, there is no basis for concluding that alternate counsel cannot assume carriage of the matter. Further, given that the hearing is six weeks away, I have been provided with no basis to conclude that there is not sufficient time to do so.
8For the same reasons, I do not find it appropriate to grant a further extension to file relevant documents and witness statements.
9The request for an adjournment and a further extension to file documents and witness statements is denied.
10The hearing will proceed as scheduled on December 1 and 2, 2014.
Dated at Toronto, this 24th day of October, 2014.
“Signed by”
Kathleen Martin
Vice-chair