HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Sharon Hamilton

Applicant

-and-

Hilton Toronto Airport Hotel & Suites

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Naomi Overend

Date: August 19, 2015

Citation: 2015 HRTO 1107

Indexed as: Hamilton v. Hilton Toronto Airport Hotel & Suites

introduction

1A hearing in respect of this Application is scheduled for August 24 and 25, 2015 in Toronto.

2On August 18, 2015 the applicant requested an adjournment of this hearing on the basis that she no longer had a lawyer. In a subsequent email, sent today, the applicant submits that she was not adequately represented by her previous lawyer, citing two examples of what she believes to be inappropriate representation.

3The respondent objects, submitting that the applicant has been represented by her lawyer since the commencement of this Application and, accordingly, has had sufficient time to assess his representation. In addition, it submits that the applicant has failed to engage in the Tribunal’s process despite letters from counsel for the respondent and Case Assessment Directions from the Tribunal. It also requests that the Application be dismissed.

4For the reasons set out below, the applicant’s adjournment request and the respondent’s dismissal request are denied and the hearing will proceed as scheduled.

5In the Amended Notice of Rescheduled Hearing issued on March 9, 2015, the parties were advised as follows:

If you cannot attend the hearing on the date(s) scheduled, you must act within 14 days of the date of this Notice to arrange for rescheduling. After that, a hearing will be adjourned or rescheduled only in exceptional circumstances, even if both parties agree to an adjournment. Retaining a new representative who is not available or prepared to proceed on the scheduled date is normally not considered an exceptional circumstance.

6The Tribunal’s Practice Direction on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests, and Requests for Adjournments provides that requests to reschedule must be made within 14 days of receiving the Notice of Hearing and that thereafter, adjournments will be granted only in extraordinary circumstances. The Practice Direction states in part as follows:

The HRTO discourages requests for adjournments outside the 14-day period to request rescheduling of a mediation or 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.

[7] When a party has been given adequate notice of the hearing, it is their responsibility to ensure that they are available and able to proceed on those dates. The applicant’s brief emails to the Tribunal do not constitute an exceptional circumstance that would justify an adjournment.

[8] With respect to the respondent’s request that the Application be dismissed, the Tribunal is not prepared to grant that request at this time. At the hearing the applicant should be prepared to explain to the Tribunal what steps she took to engage in the process following the filing of her Application.

7In the event that the Tribunal proceeds with this Application on the hearing dates, it will hear the applicant’s evidence. The respondent is not required to have its witnesses in attendance on the first day.

order

8In sum, the Tribunal has made the following orders/directions:

a. The applicant’s request to adjourn the hearing is denied.

b. The respondent’s request to dismiss the hearing is denied

c. In the event that the Tribunal proceeds with the Application, the applicant will call her evidence.

d. The respondent is not required to have its witnesses attend on the first day of hearing.