HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Jonathan Cann
Applicant
-and-
AS 4Finance Ltd.
Respondent
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Geneviève Debané
Indexed as: Cann v. AS 4Finance Ltd.
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Jonathan Cann, Applicant
Brenda Culbert, Counsel
AS 4Finance Ltd., Respondent
Chantel Goldsmith, Counsel
1A hearing into the merits of the Application is scheduled on September 4 and 5, 2014. The hearing dates were selected on the consent of both parties and a Notice of hearing was sent on February 21, 2014.
2On June 12, 2014, the respondent wrote to the Tribunal seeking an adjournment of the hearing on the basis that one of its key witnesses will not be able to attend the scheduled hearing because she has been accepted into a Graduate program and she has to attend orientation.
3The applicant filed written submissions opposing the respondent’s request for an adjournment. The applicant submits that this witness is only unavailable on the first day of hearing and regardless, would likely have been excluded from the hearing.
DECISION
4The 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.
5In 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.
6As there are no exceptional circumstances that warrant the adjournment, the Tribunal denies the adjournment request. It appears that the respondent’s witness is only unavailable to testify on September 4, 2014. However, the applicant will be called as a witness on the first day of hearing. It is more than likely that opening statements and the applicant’s evidence may take up the majority of the day. If not the parties can call their other witnesses. Further, though the respondent has not expressly stated this, even if the key witness is not available on the first day, there is ample time for the corporate respondent to select another of its employees to instruct counsel during the first day of hearing.
7In such circumstances the Tribunal finds that it is not appropriate to grant the adjournment request especially in light of the fact that this matter has been scheduled for hearing, on consent, since February 2014.
8The parties are reminded that they have to deliver to each other and file with the Tribunal their witness lists, witness statements and documents that they intend to rely on at the hearing by no later than July 21, 2014.
9I am not seized.
Dated at Toronto, this 26th day of June, 2014.
“Signed by”
Geneviève Debané
Vice-chair