Givans v. Paramount Pallet LP, 2016 HRTO 654

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Germaine Givans Applicant

-and-

Paramount Pallet LP Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Bruce Best Date: May 13, 2016 Citation: 2016 HRTO 654 Indexed as: Givans v. Paramount Pallet LP

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Germaine Givans, Applicant Joseph F. Lo Greco, Counsel

Paramount Pallet LP, Respondent Laura K. Williams, Counsel

Introduction

1This Application was filed under s.34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”).

2A hearing is scheduled in this matter for June 9 and 10, 2016, in Toronto. As the Tribunal notified the parties in the February 18, 2016 Notice of Hearing, they were required to comply with Rule 16.1 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure by March 10, 2016, and Rules 16.2, 16.3, and 17 by April 25, 2016.

3The applicant did not comply with the above Rules. By Case Assessment Direction (“CAD”) dated May 5, 2016, I directed the Applicant to comply by May 13, 2016.

4On May 10, 2016, counsel for the applicant wrote the Tribunal advising that he had been retained, and was unavailable on June 8 and 9, 2016, and requested an adjournment (as noted above, the hearing is, in fact, scheduled for June 9 and 10, 2016). The Tribunal sought further submissions from the parties, referring them to the Tribunal’s Practice Directions addressing adjournment requests, and noting that the Tribunal’s case law had generally held that the decision of a party to retain counsel after a hearing has been scheduled would not generally justify a request for an adjournment.

5The parties were given until noon on May 13, 2016 to file further submissions on the adjournment request. No further submissions were provided.

DECISION AND ANALYSIS

6The Tribunal’s Practice Direction on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests, and Requests for Adjournments states, in part:

The HRTO discourages requests for adjournments outside the 14-day period to request rescheduling of a mediation or hearing, described above. Requests for adjournments, particularly at the last minute, are a significant impediment to fair and timely access to justice. Therefore, the HRTO will only grant adjournments in extraordinary circumstances such as illness of a party, witness or representative. Absent exceptional circumstances, the HRTO will not grant adjournments, even when all parties consent.

7The Tribunal has held that retaining counsel at a late date will not generally constitute exceptional circumstances. See Vallentyne v. Royal Canadian Legion, 2009 HRTO 534 at para 6. The applicant has had notice of the hearing date for almost three months. He did not meet either of the deadlines for production of documents set out in the Notice of Hearing, and it appears that he only took steps to retain a representative when the May 5, 2016 CAD was issued.

8The applicant has failed to establish exceptional circumstances to grant the adjournment and the adjournment request is denied. The hearing will proceed on June 9 and 10, 2016 as scheduled.

Disclosure and Witness Statements

9The applicant’s hearing documents were to have been delivered to the respondent and filed with the Tribunal by April 25, 2016. These documents were not delivered or filed. However, because the applicant has recently retained counsel, who has indicated that he has not an opportunity to review the file, a brief extension to file the applicant’s hearing documents will be granted.

10By no later than May 25, 2016, the applicant must deliver to the respondent and file with the Tribunal the documents he intends to rely upon at the hearing, a list of his witnesses and a brief statement describing what his witnesses will say when they testify. The applicant is reminded that he must also submit a witness statement for himself. If the applicant does not comply with these directions by May 25, 2016, the Tribunal may take any or all steps set out in Rule 5 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure, including limiting his ability to either call witnesses or to rely on any documents not filed.

11If the applicant has other arguably relevant documents in his possession which he does not intend to rely on at the hearing, he is also required to provide copies of these documents to the respondent by May 25, 2016.

Orders and directions

12The request for an adjournment is denied. The hearing will proceed on June 9 and 10, 2016 as scheduled.

13The applicant shall comply with Rules 16 and 17, as set out above, by May 25, 2016.