Mira Freidin v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Community and Social Services, 2016 HRTO 1059

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Mira Freidin

Applicant

-and-

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Community and Social Services

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Ken Bhattacharjee

Date: August 10, 2016

Citation: 2016 HRTO 1059

Indexed as: Freiden v. Ontario (Community and Social Services)

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Mira Freidin, Applicant

Self-represented

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Community and Social Services, Respondent

Cheryl Ellison, Counsel

1The purpose of this Interim Decision is to deal with the applicant’s Request to reactivate her deferred Application, and the respondent’s Request for Summary Hearing.

2The applicant filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended.

3The Tribunal ordered the deferral of the Application pending the conclusion of a proceeding before the Social Benefits Tribunal (“SBT”).

4The applicant filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings (“RFOP”), which requested that the Tribunal reactivate her deferred Application. She attached a copy of a Decision by the SBT. The respondent filed a Response, which did not take a position on the Request. The respondent also filed a Request for Summary Hearing.

5Rules 14.3 and 14.4 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure provide that where a party wishes to proceed with an Application which has been deferred, the party must file an RFOP with the Tribunal and deliver it to the other parties within 60 days after the conclusion of the other proceeding, and must include a copy of the decision or order in the other proceeding, if any.

6In my view, the Application should be reactivated because the applicant has complied with the requirements in Rules 14.3 and 14.4.

7Accordingly, the applicant’s Request that the Tribunal reactivate her deferred Application is granted.

8The respondent’s Request for Summary Hearing is denied. Pursuant to Rule 19A.5 of the Tribunal’s Rules, the Tribunal need not give reasons for a decision not to hold a summary hearing following a party’s request.

9I am not seized of this matter.