Jim McMahon v. Wentworth Condominium Corporation #198, 2014 HRTO 708

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Jim McMahon Applicant

-and-

Wentworth Condominium Corporation #198 Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Alison Renton Date: May 20, 2014 Citation: 2014 HRTO 708 Indexed as: McMahon v. Wentworth Condominium Corporation #198

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Jim McMahon, Applicant Harry Kopyto, Representative

Wentworth Condominium Corporation #198, Respondent Devon Ryerse, Counsel

1This is an Application filed under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), alleging discrimination with respect to housing because of reprisal. The respondent has filed a Response denying the allegations. The hearing is scheduled for September 5, 2014.

2The applicant filed a Request for Order During Proceedings (“RFOP”) seeking to amend his Application with further allegations of reprisal.

3The respondent filed a Response to the RFOP. It does not object to the applicant seeking to amend his Application, but requests that the applicant underline the amendments, and that it be given a period of time to file an amended Response.

4As set out in Ibrahim v. Hilton Toronto, 2012 HRTO 740 at para. 16:

In Wozenilek v. 7-Eleven, 2010 HRTO 407, the Tribunal stated at para. 26 that it would consider the following factors in deciding whether or not to amend a pleading: (a) whether the amendment would occasion actual prejudice to the other party; (b) fairness; (c) the conduct of the party seeking the amendment; and (d) the impact of the proposed amendment on the course of the hearing and any other parties.

5In this case, the applicant’s request to amend is not opposed by the respondent. Accordingly, the Tribunal will allow the applicant to amend his Application, in the nature of those identified in the RFOP, by filing an amended Application with the Tribunal and the respondent within 10 days of the date of this Interim Decision. Given the format of the pleadings, the applicant’s amendments are to be underlined.

6The respondent has 10 days from the date the amended Application is delivered to it to file an amended Response with the Tribunal, copying the applicant, and responding only to the new allegations. Given the format of its Response, the amended Response is also to underline the amendments.

7The applicant has 10 days from the date the amended Response is delivered to file an amended Reply with the Tribunal, copying the respondent. Again, the amendments in the amended Reply are to be unlined and responsive only to the amendments in the amended Response.

8I am not seized with this matter.