Sheri Zhang v. University of Ottawa, 2016 HRTO 95

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Sheri Zhang

Applicant

-and-

University of Ottawa

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Laurie Letheren

Date: January 20, 2016

Citation: 2016 HRTO 95

Indexed as: Zhang v. University of Ottawa

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Sheri Zhang, Applicant

Self-represented

University of Ottawa, Respondent

David M. Bolger, Counsel

INTRODUCTION

1This Interim Decision addresses the applicant’s December 18, 2015 Request for an Order During Proceedings (“Request”) to reactivate her deferred Application. The respondent opposes the Request.

2Rule 14.4 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure states:

Where an Application was deferred pending the outcome of another legal proceeding, a request to proceed under Rule 14.3 must be filed no later than 60 days after the conclusion of the other proceeding, must set out the date the other legal proceeding concluded and include a copy of the decision or order in the other proceeding, if any.

3The applicant states that her reason for making this Request is that the Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB) has issued its decision.

4The respondent submits that although the OLRB has dismissed the applicant’s complaint under the Employment Standards Act (ESA), a hearing was ordered for her complaint under the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA). This hearing is scheduled for February 1, 2016.

DECISION

5The Interim Decision deferring this Application, 2015 HRTO 793 found that the substantial overlap of facts and issues, and remedies sought between the Application and the claims before the OLRB could result in inconsistent determinations if they were to proceed concurrently. In order to avoid such inconsistencies, the Tribunal ordered that this Application be deferred pending the resolution of the ESA matter.

6Although the Tribunal did not distinguish between the ESA claim and the OHSA claim in its decision to defer the Application, the overlap of facts, issues and remedies with those claimed in the Application and the OHSA claim is present. The risk of inconsistent findings remains and the Application should remain deferred under the OLRB has determined the applicant’s OHSA complaint.

7If, after the OLRB has issued its decision on the OHSA complaint, a party wishes to proceed with the Application, the party must make a Request for an Order During Proceedings in accordance with Rule 19 within 60 days of the OLRB hearing (Rules 14.3 and 14.4).

ORDER

8The applicant’s Request to reactivate this Application is denied.

9I am not seized of this matter.