Jamie MacFarlane v. Battlefield Equipment Rentals and Kent Folkerson, 2016 HRTO 96

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Jamie MacFarlane

Applicant

-and-

Battlefield Equipment Rentals and Kent Folkerson

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Jennifer Scott

Date: January 20, 2016

Citation: 2016 HRTO 96

Indexed as: MacFarlane v. Battlefield Equipment Rentals

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Battlefield Equipment Rentals and Kent Folkerson, Respondents

Paula Rusak and Sarah Smith, Counsel

Introduction

1This Interim Decision addresses the respondents’ request for particulars filed on December 16, 2015. The applicant did not respond to this request.

2The purpose of particulars is to alert respondents and the Tribunal as to what alleged facts and legal issues give rise to a breach of the Code.

3The applicant has provided sufficient detail in his Application concerning his allegations of discrimination. The fact that the respondents have filed their Response to these allegations supports this finding.

4A Notice of Hearing has not been issued in this matter. As such, the Application has not been set down for a hearing. Once the Notice of Hearing is issued, the parties’ disclosure obligations will be determined. Twenty-one days after the Notice of Hearing is issued, the parties will be required to disclose their arguably relevant documents to each other. If there are any audio copies of voicemails by the personal respondent in the possession of the applicant, they will be disclosed at that time.

5Forty-five days prior to the commencement of the hearing, the parties will be required to file their hearing documents and their witness statements. At that time, the applicant’s evidence in support of his allegations will be particularized. Much of the information requested by the respondents will be addressed in the witness statements. If there is a need for further or more complete witness statements, the respondents can make that request at that time. If there are any issues with respect to the information sought by the respondents, they can be raised by the applicant at that time.

6At this point, the respondents’ request is premature and is denied.

order

7The respondents’ request for particulars is denied.

8The applicant has not responded to the last two Requests for Orders During Proceedings filed by the respondents. Within 14 days of the date of this Interim Decision, the applicant must advise the Tribunal whether he intends to proceed with the Application.