A.B. v. Sunshine Montessori School, 2015 HRTO 1444

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

A.B.

Applicant

-and-

Sunshine Montessori School

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Laurie Letheren Date: October 29, 2015 Citation: 2015 HRTO 1444 Indexed as: A.B. v. Sunshine Montessori School

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

A.B., Applicant Self-represented

Sunshine Montessori School, Respondent Neeena Gupta, Counsel

1The applicant has filed an Application alleging discrimination in services on the basis of race, colour, ethnic origin and creed contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”).

deferral

2On October 2, 2015, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer on the basis that the Ontario Superior Court of Justice issued an Order in Court File Number 44872-10 that the Application is stayed pending a final disposition of that matter. The Tribunal sought submissions from the parties on the issue of deferral.

3On October 2, 2015 the respondent filed submissions on the issue of deferral. The respondent submits that the Application must be deferred and that the hearing date of March 15, 2016 must be cancelled as a result of the Order of Justice Sloan. The Notice of Hearing directs the parties to exchange all arguably relevant documents by October 19, 2015 which is prior to the date of the trial of the matter for which this Order was made. The respondent submits that there is no clear indication when there will be a final disposition of Court File Number 44872-10.

4On October 6, 2015, the applicant filed submissions in which she agrees that the matter is to be deferred as a result of the Order. She submits that she is able to proceed with the hearing on March 15, 2016.

deferral

5The Tribunal may defer consideration of an application, on such terms as it may determine, on its own initiative or at the request of any party (Rule 14.1 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure). The Tribunal must consider, in light of the particular circumstances of each case, whether deferral is the most fair, just and expeditious way of proceeding with the application.

6In the present case, the Application must be deferred as a result of the Order. Given that the final disposition of Court File Number 44872-10 may not be made in sufficient time for the parties to properly prepare for the hearing scheduled for March 15, 2016, the hearing is cancelled for that date. The requirements that the parties deliver and file documents and witness statements, as set out in the Tribunal’s Notice of Hearing in this matter, is also suspended in light of the stay and deferral.

7The Tribunal directs the parties’ attention to Rule 14 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure which sets out the procedure if a party wishes to proceed with an application that has been deferred. The parties are reminded that should they wish to proceed with the Application after there is a final disposition of Superior Court File Number 44872-10, they must advise the Tribunal of this intention within 60 days of the final disposition of the matter.

Anonymization

8The Tribunal has recognized the enhanced vulnerability of minors and the importance of protecting their identities from public disclosure. Tribunal Rule 3.11.1 reflects the general approach of anonymizing the identity of children under 18 and other participants as necessary to protect the identity of a child.

9In this Application, I find that it is appropriate to use the letters A.B. rather than the applicant’s name. In any future decisions, the Tribunal should consider the need to anonymize the applicant’s child, the child’s parents and other participants in order to protect the identity of the applicant’s child.

order

10The Application is deferred until the final disposition of matter identified by the Ontario Superior Court File Number 44872-10.

11The initials A.B. shall be used to identify the applicant. The style of cause is amended accordingly.

12The hearing date of March 15, 2016 is cancelled.

13I am not seized.

Dated at Toronto, this 29th day of October, 2015.

“Signed by”

Laurie Letheren

Vice-chair

CORRECTION

The decision released on October 29, 2015 incorrectly substituted the words “Consent Order” for the word “Order” at paragraphs 3, 4, and 6 of the decision. The error is corrected.