Gary Novelli v. Grisson Bon Ltd., 2017 HRTO 1040

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Gary Novelli

Applicant

-and-

Grisson Bon Ltd.

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Mary Truemner

Date: August 11, 2017

Citation: 2017 HRTO 1040

Indexed as: Novelli v. Grisson Bon Ltd.

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Grisson Bon Ltd., Respondent

Geoff B. Daley, Counsel

1This Interim Decision addresses the respondent’s request to amend its Response, and provides the applicant with directions on what information to include in his witness statement due to be filed August 14, 2017.

background

2The respondent originally filed a Response to the Application on September 19, 2016, addressing the applicant’s allegations of reprisal and discrimination because of family status in the area of employment contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended. Specifically, the applicant alleges that he asked the respondent for a shift change at work so that he might see his children with whom, according to his subsequently filed Reply, he did not live, but with whom he was able to visit pursuant to an agreement with his ex-wife. The applicant essentially alleges that making the request for the shift change in order to see his children triggered events which led to what he considers to be an unfair termination of his employment.

3On May 18, 2017, the respondent filed a Request for Order During Proceedings, seeking to amend the Response to add details to the reasons for ultimately not allowing the shift change, and for terminating the applicant’s employment. The applicant never filed a position or submissions in response to the Request.

decision

4In determining requests to amend pleadings, the Tribunal generally considers the nature of the proposed amendments, the reasons for the amendments, the timing of the request to amend, and the prejudice to the opposing party. See, for example, Odell v. TTC, [2001] OHRBID No. 2, Dube v. Canadian Career College, 2008 HRTO 336, and Wozenilek v. 7-Eleven Canada Inc., 2009 HRTO 926.

5Having considered the factors set out above, I grant the respondent’s request to amend the Response. The amendments provide details that would be required from the witnesses at the upcoming hearing, and actually assist rather than prejudice the applicant.

order

6For the reasons set out above, the Tribunal orders as follows:

a. the respondent’s request to amend the Response is granted; and

b. the amended Response attached to the respondent’s Request for Order During Proceedings filed on May 18, 2017 shall be considered the Amended Response.

directions

7In the circumstance of a fast approaching deadline under the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure for the parties to file their witness statements and documents upon which they intend to rely at the hearing (due August 14, 2017), the Tribunal allows an extension of seven (7) days to the parties to file those documents. They are now due on August 21, 2017.

8Amongst the other documents that the applicant needs to file to comply with Rules 16 and 17 of the Tribunal’s Rules, the applicant is directed to file a witness statement for himself which includes an explanation of why he required the shift he requested, and could not see his children if he worked another shift. He must also include in his witness statement a summary of what he will be saying when testifying about the agreement he had with his wife in terms of childcare.