Rodney Whitlow v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change, 2015 HRTO 950

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Rodney Whitlow

Applicant

-and-

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change

Respondent

-and-

The Association of Management, Administrative and Professional Crown Employees of Ontario

Intervenor

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Alison Renton Date: July 17, 2015 Citation: 2015 HRTO 950 Indexed as: Whitlow v. Ministry (Environment and Climate Change)

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Richard Whitlow, Applicant Self-represented

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change, Respondent Jennifer Richards, Counsel

Association of Management, Administrative, & Professional Crown Employees of Ontario, Intervenor Marisa Pollock, Counsel

1This Application alleges discrimination with respect to employment because of race, ancestry, place of origin, citizenship, and reprisal contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”).

2The respondent filed a Response in which it takes the position that the Tribunal should dismiss the Application because the applicant signed a full and final release with respect to the same issues raised in the Application.

3This Interim Decision addresses the disclosure of Memorandum of Settlement into which the parties and the intervenor entered on July 14, 2014 (“the settlement”) as well as the Notice of Intervention filed by the intervenor.

notice of intervention

4The Association of Management, Administrative & Professional Crown Employees of Ontario (“the intervenor”) filed a Notice of Intervention after it received the Application.

5Neither party has filed an objection to the intervenor’s request, and accordingly its request is granted and the style of cause has been amended. The extent of the intervenor’s participation will be left to the hearing adjudicator.

the settlement

6When the respondent filed its Response, it took the position that the Tribunal ought to dismiss the Application. The respondent submitted that the applicant signed a full and final release with respect to the issues raised in the Application (“the dismissal request”). In the Response, it referred to some paragraphs of the settlement, but did not file a copy of the settlement.

7By Registrar’s letter dated June 18, 2015, the Tribunal sought submissions from the parties and the intervenor about whether:

a. The complete settlement should be disclosed in the file;

b. The confidentiality of the settlement being disclosed in the file; and

c. Any submissions to address any confidentiality concerns the parties may have.

8The parties and the intervenor all agree that the settlement should be disclosed.

9The respondent submits that it should be disclosed pursuant to a Tribunal order, and only for the purposes of its dismissal request.

10The applicant submits that the settlement should be disclosed in this file. However, in addition to other information he submitted, he expressed concern about confidentiality, including whether the disclosure is accessible to the public pursuant to Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F. 31, and cited examples of what he alleged are breaches of confidentiality by the respondent.

11The intervenor supports the applicant’s position that the entire settlement should be produced.

analysis

12Rules 1.7(p), (q), and (s) of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure permit the Tribunal to order disclosure of any document, information or thing and to give orders that are necessary to give effect to an order.

13Since the parties and the intervenor all agree that disclosure of the settlement is necessary, the Tribunal orders it disclosure, subject to the terms set out below.

14With respect to the applicant’s FIPPA concern, the Tribunal notes that it provides written notification to a party about a FIPPA request, and seeks the party’s written submissions, before deciding to grant or deny disclosure to a FIPPA request pertaining to a file.

15Any further confidentiality concerns can be raised by the parties during the course of the proceedings.

order

16The Tribunal orders the following:

1. The Memorandum of Settlement into which the parties and the intervenor entered on July 14, 2014 is to be disclosed by the respondent to the applicant and intervenor and filed with the Tribunal within 10 days of the date of this Interim Decision; and,

2. The disclosure of the settlement in this file is for the sole and express purpose of determining the respondent’s request that the Application be dismissed in light of the clauses contained in the settlement, and for no other purpose.

17I am not seized with this matter.