Rosa Andreetta v. Shoppers Drug Mart Specialty Health Network, 2014 HRTO 316

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Rosa Andreetta

Applicant

-and-

Shoppers Drug Mart Specialty Health Network

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Ruth Carey

Date: March 10, 2014

Citation: 2014 HRTO 316

Indexed as: Andreetta v. Shoppers Drug Mart Specialty Health Network

1This Interim Decision addresses a Request for Order During Proceeding (“RFOP”) filed on March 7, 2014, by Sheilagh Commeford (the “applicant’s witness”) requesting an order to quash a summons to appear at the hearing of this Application currently scheduled to be heard in Toronto on March 13, and 14, 2014.

2The RFOP says that on March 7, 2014, the applicant’s witness was served a summons to appear at the hearing by the applicant. The applicant’s witness has non-refundable tickets to fly to Abu Dhabi with a family member departing Toronto on the evening of March 11, 2014, and returning March 24, 2014. Attached to the RFOP is a copy of the ticket and itinerary.

3Given the urgency of this request, a few minutes after receiving the RFOP the Registrar asked the applicant to provide her Response to the Request for Order in Form 11 by noon on Monday, March 10, 2014.

4The applicant then replied via e-mail saying she is amenable to the witness attending at an alternate date as designated by the Tribunal but is not agreeable to having the applicant’s witness removed from the list of witnesses that the applicant will be calling to testify.

5On March 10, 2014, the respondent filed and delivered submissions with respect to the RFOP. The respondent submits that the applicant’s witness should be entirely relieved from the obligation to testify at the hearing because the applicant waited until the Friday before the hearing to serve the summons, and because her proposed evidence is repetitive and unnecessary. I take the respondent’s submissions to mean it does not oppose the request in the RFOP to quash the summons; rather, it objects to the applicant’s suggestion that there will be additional days of hearing at some point in the future when the applicant’s witness will be called to testify.

6The summons to appear on March 13, and 14, 2014, shall be quashed. With respect to the issue of whether or not additional days of hearing will be necessary to call the applicant’s witness at some point in the future, the parties will be asked for their submissions at the conclusion of the applicant’s case. This means that the applicant’s witness can expect to hear from the applicant further if she is required to appear to testify in the future.

DECISION

7The RFOP is granted. The summons to appear at the hearing on March 13, and 14, 2014, served on Sheilagh Commeford is quashed.

8The applicant will contact the applicant’s witness if she is required to appear to testify in the future.