Issa Muse v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Labour, 2016 HRTO 259

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

Between:

Issa Muse Applicant

-and-

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Labour Respondent

-and-

Dari Alan Laine Intervenor

Interim Decision

Adjudicator: Yasmeena Mohamed Date: February 25, 2016 Citation: 2016 HRTO 259 Indexed as: Muse v. Ontario (Labour)

Written Submissions

Issa Muse, Applicant Billeh A. Hamud, Counsel

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario, as represented by the Ministry of Labour, Respondent Caroline Cohen, Counsel

Dari Alan Laine, Intervenor Soma Ray-Ellis, Counsel

Introduction

1This is an Application filed on April 23, 2015, pursuant to s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"). The hearing in this matter is scheduled for March 9 and 10, 2016.

2The applicant alleges that he applied for the position of Chemical Engineer with the respondent and was not awarded the position because of his race, ancestry and place of origin. The applicant alleges that the respondent awarded the position to the affected party, Dari Alan Laine, despite his lack of a professional designation and qualification required for the position. By way of remedy, the applicant seeks instatement to the Chemical Engineer position.

3This Interim Decision deals with the Request to Intervene filed by the affected party on February 2, 2016.

4Mr. Laine submits that he should be granted intervenor status in the application because he has a direct interest in the proceedings, as the Tribunal's decision could directly affect his employment status. Specifically, he submits that he could be potentially displaced from his position which he has now held for approximately one and a half years.

5To date neither the applicant nor the respondent has filed any response or objection to the Request to Intervene.

6The Tribunal's Rule 11.1 provides:

The Tribunal may allow a person or organization to intervene in any case at any time on such terms as the Tribunal may determine. The Tribunal will determine the extent to which an intervenor will be permitted to participate in a proceeding.

7The Tribunal has granted intervenor status to an incumbent employee in circumstances where the remedy sought could potentially affect the incumbent's position: see Xu v. Georgian College of Applied Arts and Technology, 2010 HRTO 1009; Gazankas v. Municipality of Red Lake, 2011 HRTO 1498 and Hussain v. Ottawa Police Services Board, 2013 HRTO 1808.

8In light of the potential effect of this proceeding on Mr. Laine, I find it is appropriate to grant him status as an intervenor at the hearing with status to cross-examine witnesses, call evidence, and make submissions on issues relevant to his personal interest. He must deliver a copy of any documents upon which he intends to rely and a summary of the proposed evidence of any witness, including himself, to the other parties and file them, with a statement of delivery, with the Registrar within 7 calendar days of the date of this Interim Decision.

Order

9For the above reasons, I make the following order:

a) Mr. Laine is granted intervenor standing in this proceeding, with the status to cross-examine witnesses, call evidence, and make submissions on issues relevant to his personal interest; and

b) Mr. Laine must provide a copy of any documents upon which he intends to rely and a summary of the proposed evidence of any witness, including himself, to the other parties and file this with the Tribunal within 7 calendar days of the date of this Interim Decision.