Karen Rodman v. United Church of Canada and London Conference of The United Church of Canada, 2017 HRTO 1219

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Karen Rodman

Applicant

-and-

United Church of Canada and London Conference of The United Church of Canada

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Brian Cook

Date: September 18, 2017

Citation: 2017 HRTO 1219

Indexed as: Rodman v. United Church of Canada

1This Interim Decision addresses issues related to the Application.

2The Application was filed on May 25, 2016. The Tribunal has held two mediation sessions which did not result in a settlement. The next step in the Tribunal’s process is to schedule a hearing. When a hearing is scheduled, the Tribunal provides directions to the parties about the requirement to disclose documents. The first requirement is for each party to disclose to the other parties all arguably relevant documents within the party’s control. The second and later requirement is to file with the Tribunal and the other parties the documents the party intends to rely on at the hearing. These disclosure obligations are set out in Rule 16 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure, which can be accessed from the website of the Social Justice Tribunal of Ontario, sjto.gov.on.ca.

Request for disclosure of documents

3The applicant has filed a request for disclosure by the respondents of various documents. This request is premature. The applicant should first receive the Tribunal’s Notice of Hearing and then receive the disclosure from the respondents.

Requests to Intervene

4The Tribunal has also received a Request to Intervene, filed by Palestinian and Jewish Unity organization. The Request to Intervene is supported by the applicant and opposed by the respondents. There is also a Request to Intervene filed by Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East. It appears that the parties have not formally responded to this Request.

5Although a large number of documents have been filed in this case, the exact nature of the applicant’s allegations and how those allegations relate to the applicant’s rights under the Code are not clear. Until the allegations are clarified, it is not possible to determine if the Requests to Intervene should be granted.

6A determination of the Requests to Intervene will be dealt with by the Tribunal at a later date, and after a Vice-chair of the Tribunal has been assigned as adjudicator.

Request to add respondent

7The applicant has filed a Request to add the Algoma Presbytery of the United Church of Canada as a respondent. The events giving rise to the Application as described in the Application appear to be rooted in the period when the applicant was part of the Algoma Presbytery. However, the Presbytery is part of the overall United Church of Canada and it is not clear why the Presbytery needs to be added as a separate entity. The Request to amend the Application to include the Algoma Presbytery of the United Church of Canada is denied.