Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
B E T W E E N:
Renee Savoie
Applicant
-and-
Toronto Police Services Board, Toronto Police Service,
Chief of Police of the Toronto Police Service, and Ian McLaughlin
Respondents
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: David Muir
Indexed as: Savoie v. Toronto Police Services Board
1The purpose of this Interim Decision is to address the respondents’ Request for order During Proceeding (“Request”) in which they seek the following relief:
a. Leave to file a Response to the Application on behalf of the respondent Chief of the Toronto Police Service (“Chief”);
b. The removal of the individual respondent Ian McLaughlin;
c. Bifurcation of the hearing scheduled to take place on September 28 and 29, 2016, between liability and monetary remedies and non-monetary remedies.
2The applicant consents to the Request as it relates to the request in paragraph 1(a). The applicant opposes both other requests on a number of grounds.
3In her Application the applicant alleges that the personal respondent Ian McLaughlin failed to accommodate her disability-related needs while on duty at a construction site in Toronto. The applicant also alleges that the respondents’ complaint mechanism was inaccessible to her.
Request to Remove Ian McLaughlin
4The Request to remove Ian McLaughlin as a respondent is denied. I agree that the Request is premature. I come to this conclusion because in the particular circumstances of this case one of the respondents, the Chief, has not yet filed a Response. This, combined with the fact that at this stage, it appears that the conduct of Ian McLaughlin is as argued by the applicant central to the Application. This may or may not change as a result of the Chief’s Response, but prior to the completion of the pleadings this is somewhat speculative.
Bifurcation
5The respondent’s Request that the hearing be bifurcated is denied. I agree with the applicant that the Request is both premature and speculative at this point. Bifurcation is not the norm; in fact, it is unusual. That does not mean that the Tribunal will not in the appropriate case bifurcate the proceeding. In any event this is an issue best left to the adjudicator assigned to the hearing after the parties have completed disclosure and filing required by Rule 17.1.
Order
6The Tribunal makes the following Orders:
a. Leave is granted to the Chief to file a Response to the Application within 28 days of the date of this Interim Decision.
b. The request to remove the personal respondent Ian McLaughlin is denied at this stage.
c. The request to bifurcate the hearing is denied at this stage.
7I am not seized of this case.
Dated at Toronto, this 18th day of March, 2016.
“Signed by”
David Muir
Vice-chair