Richard-Benjamin Bishop v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, Student Financial Assistance Branch, 2015 HRTO 525

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Richard-Benjamin Bishop

Applicant

-and-

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, Student Financial Assistance Branch

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Laurie Letheren Date: April 23, 2015 Citation: 2015 HRTO 525 Indexed as: Bishop v. Ontario (Training, Colleges and Universities)

Written Submissions

Richard-Benjamin Bishop, Applicant

Self-Represented

Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, Student Financial Assistance Branch, Respondent

Fatema Dada, Counsel

Introduction

1The purpose of this Interim Decision is to deal with the respondent’s request to adjourn the hearing scheduled for April 24, 2015.

2On August 26, 2014, the applicant filed an Application for Contravention of Settlement. The respondent filed a Response on October 27, 2014, and the applicant’s Reply was filed on October 29, 2014.

3The hearing of the Application is scheduled for April 24, 2015.

4On April 23, 2015, the Respondent sent a fax transmission to the Tribunal indicating that the parties are currently working on settling this matter and therefore request the hearing be adjourned.

5The Tribunal’s Practice Direction on Scheduling provides that requests to reschedule must be made within fourteen (14) days of receiving the Confirmation of Hearing and that thereafter, adjournments will be granted only in extraordinary circumstances. The Practice Direction states the following regarding requests for adjournments:

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.

Where a party seeks to adjourn a previously scheduled mediation or hearing, they must contact the Registrar as soon as the need arises. They must contact the other parties to seek their consent, and to discuss alternative dates for the rescheduling of the mediation or hearing.

The party making the request should contact the Registrar and provide the exceptional circumstances supporting the request and any alternative agreed upon dates. Where the request is on short notice, the party must contact the Registrar by email or fax.

The HRTO typically will not adjourn a hearing date because the parties wish to “engage in settlement discussions” or are “close to a deal.” The HRTO encourages mediation and settlements, and will assist the parties in this regard. Where parties believe they may be able to resolve a matter shortly before the scheduled hearing, they may request mediation/adjudication in accordance with Rule 15A (and Rule 8A and 17A for s. 53(3) and s. 53(5) applications). However, the HRTO discourages the cancellation or adjournment of hearing dates so that the parties can explore settlement.

6The reasons for the request to adjourn do not constitute exceptional circumstances that would permit an adjournment.

Order

7The respondent’s request to adjourn the hearing is denied.

8Mediation/adjudication will be offered to the parties at the commencement of the hearing.