HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Donna Silva Applicant
-and-
Global Pet Foods, Donna Sankar and Danielle Clews Respondents
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Geneviève Debané Date: January 20, 2015 Citation: 2014 HRTO 78 Indexed as: Silva v. Global Pet Foods
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Donna Silva, Applicant
Maurice Brenner, Counsel
1This is an Application filed under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), alleging discrimination with respect to employment as against the above-named personal respondents.
2On November 18, 2013, the applicant filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings seeking to amend the Application and to also add Global Pet Food as a respondent.
[3] On December 13, 2013, the Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction which directed that a. the personal respondents’ representative had to confirm whether she could accept service of the Request for order on behalf of Global Pet Foods; and b. that Global Pet Foods had to file a response to the Request for order by no later than January 7, 2014.
4On December 17, 2013, the personal respondents’ representative confirmed that she could accept service of the Request on behalf of Global Pet Foods.
5As of this date, the personal respondents and Global Pet Foods have not filed a response to the Request for order.
Request to amend to Application
6In considering requests to amend applications under section 34 of the Code, the Tribunal generally considers the nature of the proposed amendments, the reasons for the amendments, the timing of the request to amend, and the prejudice to the respondent(s). See, for example, Dube v. Canadian Career College, 2008 HRTO 336; Wozenilek v. 7-Eleven Canada Inc., 2009 HRTO 926; and Dunford v. Holiday Ford Sales, 2009 HRTO 1563. The Tribunal is also guided by what would be most fair, just and expeditious in the circumstances.
7The applicant was unrepresented at the time that she filed her Application and has since retained counsel who immediately filed the Request for order which in essence clarifies the allegations in the original Application. Having considered the matter I find that it is appropriate to grant the amendments sought by the applicant especially in light of the fact that Request was made expeditiously and prior to mediation. Further, the Request to amend is unopposed.
Request to add Global Foods
8The Tribunal, on its own initiative, or at the request of a party, may add parties to the hearing if it appears that they may have infringed a right under the Code. The Tribunal may add a party in order to provide for “fair, just and expeditious” resolution of an application, under s. 1.7 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure. As noted in Marchese v. Fortinos, 2009 HRTO 25, 2009 HRTO 25, the Tribunal will not add a proposed party in a perfunctory manner or as a matter of formality. Rather, it will decide whether it is appropriate to do so based on the parties’ materials and arguments. A recent statement of relevant considerations is set out in Smyth v. Toronto Police Services Board, 2009 HRTO 1513 at para. 12:
(1) Are there allegations made that could support a finding that the proposed respondent violated the Code?
(2) If the proposed respondent is an individual and an organization is also named, is there a compelling reason to include him or her as a respondent?
(3) Would it be fair, in all the circumstances, to add the proposed respondent?
9On a review of the written material filed in this matter Global Pet Foods could as the applicant’s former employer, depending on the circumstances, be the subject of findings or a Tribunal order. As such it is appropriate to add Global Pet Foods as a respondent to the Application. I also note that the Request to add a party is also unopposed.
Order
10The Tribunal orders as follows:
a. The applicant’s Request for an Order during Proceeding is granted and the Application is amended to include the allegations contained therein;
b. Global Pet Foods is added as a respondent to the Application and the style of cause shall be immediately amended to reflect this change;
c. The personal respondents’ representatives must confirm that she can accept this Interim Decision on behalf of Global Pet Foods and if she cannot then she must provide the contact information for Global Pet Foods within three days of the date of this Interim Decision;
d. Within 35 days of the date of this Interim Decision Global Pet Foods must file a Response to the Application and its amendments; and
e. Within 35 days of the date of this Interim Decision the personal respondents can file a Response to the applicant’s amendments.
11The Tribunal reminds the parties that a Mediation is scheduled in this matter on February 6, 2014.
12I am not seized.
Dated at Toronto, this 20th day of January, 2014.
“Signed By”
Geneviève Debané
Vice-chair