M.H. v. Waterloo Region District School Board, 2014 HRTO 1659

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

M.H. by his Litigation Guardian Y.S.

Applicant

-and-

Waterloo Region District School Board, Sandra Black, Michael Frey and Maureen Perlanski

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Maureen Doyle

Date: November 14, 2014

Citation: 2014 HRTO 1659

Indexed as: M.H. v. Waterloo Region District School Board

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

M.H. by his Litigation Guardian Y.S., Applicant

Y.S., Litigation Guardian

Waterloo Region District School Board, Sandra Black, Michael Frey and Maureen Perlanski, Respondents

Nadya Tymochenko, Counsel

1This Application is scheduled to be heard in Toronto on November 19 and 20, 2014, from 1:00 pm to 5:00 pm. The hours of the hearing are pursuant to the applicant’s Litigation Guardian’s request for accommodation.

2Notice of Confirmation of Hearing in this matter was sent to the parties on May 21, 2014. Included in that notice was direction with respect to dates for disclosure pursuant to the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure and direction regarding requests for adjournments. It noted that if a party seeks an adjournment, they are to do so within 14 days of the Notice of Confirmation of Hearing. It advised the parties that a hearing would only be adjourned or rescheduled in exceptional circumstances.

3On November 9, 2014, the applicant’s Litigation Guardian wrote to the Tribunal, requesting an adjournment due to “personal business in Nov, Dec until the end of April 2015” and asking if it is possible to set a hearing date in May 2015.

4The respondents object to the applicant’s request for an adjournment.

DECISION

5The 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.

Where a party seeks to adjourn a previously scheduled mediation or hearing, they must contact the Registrar as soon as the need arises. They must contact the other parties to seek their consent, and to discuss alternative dates for the rescheduling of the mediation or hearing.

The party making the request should contact the Registrar and provide the exceptional circumstances supporting the request and any alternative agreed upon dates. Where the request is on short notice, the party must contact the Registrar by email or fax.

6In 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. For that reason, among others, the Tribunal’s Information Bulletin on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests and Requests for Adjournments indicates that even adjournment requests made on consent of the parties more than five days after the hearing is scheduled may be denied. The Tribunal has balanced the interests of parties in having hearings scheduled according to their and counsel’s availability with these broader interests by requiring that a party advise within five days that they are unavailable, and providing that requests for adjournment will not otherwise be granted, absent exceptional circumstances.

7The applicant’s Litigation Guardian has not disclosed any extraordinary circumstances to support the request for an adjournment. The request was filed well in excess of the time frames stated in the above-noted Notice of Hearing and Practice Direction, and was made less than two weeks prior to the scheduled hearing dates. In these circumstances, I am not satisfied that the respondent has provided a reason that would justify granting an adjournment. I do not find that there are exceptional circumstances that warrant adjournment of this hearing, and request to adjourn the scheduled hearing days is denied. The hearing will proceed on the dates scheduled.

8I am not seized.