Moshi v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services), 2015 HRTO 727

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Youkhana Moshi

Applicant

-and-

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Kathleen Martin Date: June 2, 2015 Citation: 2015 HRTO 727 Indexed as: Moshi v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services)

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Youkhan Moshi, Applicant Self-represented

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services, Respondent No submissions

1This is an Application filed under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended. This Interim Decision addresses a request by the applicant to defer the Application until the applicant has "completed and resolved" a pending application before the Tribunal and a separate proceeding in relation to benefits denied under the Ontario Disability Support Program ("ODSP").

Background

2The Application alleges discrimination in services on the basis of various grounds including disability, creed and race. A Response has been filed denying the allegations.

3On March 5, 2015, the Response was delivered to the applicant following which the applicant wrote to the Tribunal asking that the Application be deferred or put "on hold" until he has "sorted out other matters and applications" at the Tribunal and the "Social Justice Tribunals of Ontario". The other matters appear to be Tribunal File 2014-17509-I, which the applicant states is an application against "ODSP staff", and an application before what the applicant characterizes as "an appeal board" in relation to benefits denied by the ODSP. The applicant submits that "due to the fact [sic] that the above mentioned file numbers" most of his ODSP income and benefits have been denied and/or tremendously reduced, which places him in financial hardship. The applicant states that he is unable to pay for costs and materials such as fax, copies, transportation and counsel.

4In addition to financial constraints, the applicant references health issues (which he identifies) and the fact that he is self-represented. The applicant submits that he is unable to defend, prepare and complete the above file at this time and that he is "in Emotional pressure" because he is handling "too many applications…. without counsel".

5The applicant sent a copy of his submissions to the respondent but the respondent has not filed any submissions in response.

Decision

6Under Rule 14.1 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure, the Tribunal may defer consideration of an application, on such terms as it may determine, on its own initiative or at the request of a party. The Tribunal has stated that deferral is not automatically invoked simply because the parties are involved in other legal proceedings. It is a discretionary measure that the Tribunal exercises on the basis of the circumstances in each case. Absent good reason, applicants and respondents before the Tribunal are entitled to expect the Tribunal to take timely action to resolve complaints of discrimination brought before it.

7In determining whether or not to defer an application, the Tribunal considers a number of factors including the subject matter of the other proceeding, the nature of the other proceeding, the type of remedies available and whether it would be fair overall to the parties to defer, having regard to the status of each proceeding. In the typical case, the Tribunal considers deferral when there are other legal proceedings dealing with the subject matter of the Application.

8In other circumstances, the Tribunal has adjourned a matter where there are legitimate reasons to do so. A party's inability to participate in the proceeding for health-related reasons may qualify as a legitimate reason.

9In this case, while I can appreciate the applicant's difficult financial circumstances, I am not satisfied based on the information presented that it would be appropriate to defer the Application.

10First, it bears mention that the applicant has not provided any information which would suggest that there is any overlap between the subject matter of the Application and either of the other proceedings so the typical reason to defer does not exist. Based on the limited information provided it would appear that both of the other applications have to do with the applicant's dealings in respect of the staff and/or benefits provided under the ODSP, which is not the subject matter of the Application.

11Assuming without finding that financial constraints would ever be a reason to defer or hold an application by adjourning it, I am not convinced that the information provided justifies deferral or adjournment of the Application. The applicant's request appears to be premised on the assumption that the other matters will resolve in his favour (such that his financial circumstances will improve). There is no basis on which to conclude that this is the case.

12Finally, while the applicant references health issues, he has not provided sufficient information to justify holding an application in abeyance for health-related reasons. While the applicant refers to being under "pressure", I am not convinced this is a unique situation for applicants or unrepresented parties generally.

13In all the circumstances, the applicant's request is denied. The Application will continue to be processed. The applicant is required to file a Reply, if any, within 14 days of the date of this Interim Decision.