Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
B E T W E E N:
Sandra Laryea Applicant
-and-
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services Respondent
A N D B E T W E E N:
Mark Archer Applicant
-and-
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services Respondent
A N D B E T W E E N:
Hayton Morrison Applicant
-and-
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services Respondent
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Mary Truemner
Indexed as: Laryea v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services)
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Sandra Laryea, Mark Archer and Hayton Morrison, Applicant Self-represented
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services, Respondent Andrea Huckins, Counsel
Introduction
1These Applications were filed under the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"), on April 15, 2016 by the African Canadian Legal Clinic ("the clinic"), the applicants' counsel. The Applications allege reprisal and discrimination with respect to employment because of race, colour, ancestry, place of origin and ethnic origin. The applicants are employed by the respondent as correctional officers, and allege that there is a link between these grounds and adverse treatment by the respondent, including unfair discipline and the absence of career advancement.
2The hearing for this matter is scheduled for October 17 and 18, 2017. On October 2, 2017, the applicant, Mr. Archer, writing on his own behalf and what seemed to be on behalf of the other applicants, requested that the time for filing witness statements and documents for the hearing be extended and the hearing adjourned.
3This Interim Decision grants the request to adjourn and the request to extend time to file witness statements and documents upon which the applicants intend to rely at the hearing.
Background
4The clinic emailed the Tribunal and the respondent on September 28, 2017, notifying them that it is no longer representing the applicants in this matter. The Tribunal noted, in a Case Assessment Direction ("CAD") dated October 2, 2017, that the parties had not complied with its Rules of Procedure as pertains to the filing of witness statements and documents upon which the parties intend to rely. The CAD directed the parties to file the statements and documents by October 6, 2017. Minutes after the CAD was issued, Mr. Archer filed the request to adjourn and to extend the time for filing hearing documents for the reason that the clinic had just ended their retainer representing the applicants, and the clinic was having difficulty in providing copies of their files to the applicants. Attached to his request are copies of media reports on the serious trouble the clinic is having with its core funder, and the threat that the clinic may soon close, as well as an email exchange which supports the applicants' position that the clinic is having problems preparing the applicants' files for them to retrieve in order to represent themselves.
5The Tribunal emailed the parties later that day, on October 2, 2017, stating:
The applicant, Mr. Archer, filed a Form 10 today which appears to be on behalf of all applicants in this matter, and requests an extension for filing documents prior to the hearing scheduled for October 17 and 18, 2017, as well as an adjournment request so that the hearing may be postponed to a later date. The Form 10 was filed immediately after the Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction which did not address an adjournment.
By October 5, 2017, the respondent must file its position with respect to the applicants' request.
By October 5, 2017, the applicants must each file confirmation that they are being represented by Mr. Archer in this matter, or, if not Mr. Archer, whether they are each self-representing. They must also confirm their mailing and email addresses.
6On October 4, 2017, the respondent filed a response to the applicants' request, opposing both the adjournment and the request to extend the deadline for the applicants to file their witness statements and documents. In the alternative, the respondent asks that the applicants' statements and documents should be due by no later than November 10, 2017. There are no reasons for choosing this date.
7The applicants have not met the October 5, 2017 deadline to clarify that each of them is self-representing, but, until the applicants notify the Tribunal otherwise, I shall assume this to be the case. On October 5, 2017, the applicant, Mark Archer, filed a Form 10, seemingly on behalf of all applicants, but he did not answer the question posed by the Tribunal's email quoted above. In the Form 10, Mr. Archer reiterated his request for an adjournment:
The same reasons as submitted to the Registrar and the Respondent on Monday, October 05, 2017 [Monday, October 2, 2017], with the additional reasons as follows: The Applicants did not receive the Case Direction sent out by the Registrar as it was sent to our former Counsel. The Human Rights Legal Support Centre needs time to review our case and should be advising the Tribunal of this today, October 05, 2017.
8It would appear, then, that the applicants were hoping to have retained new counsel by today, and hoping that their new counsel would contact the Tribunal. The Tribunal has heard nothing from any counsel at the Human Rights Legal Support Centre.
Analysis and Decision
9The Tribunal's Practice Direction on Scheduling of Hearings and Mediations, Rescheduling Requests and Requests for Adjournments provides that requests to reschedule must be made within 14 days of receiving the Confirmation of Hearing, and, outside that time, adjournments will be granted only in extraordinary circumstances, such as illness of a party, witness or representative.
10The clinic took care of the applicants' pleadings and has been handling their case since its inception one and a half years ago. The issues involved in this case are complex and the applicants have suddenly found themselves without representation on what might be characterized as the eve of the hearing, with the clinic having missed the deadline for filing the applicants' documents under the Tribunal's Rules. While the applicants' request to adjourn is outside the period of 14 days after the Confirmation of Hearing was received by them, I find that these circumstances are extraordinary, and an adjournment is justified. In granting an adjournment, I see no reason not to grant the applicants' request for an extension for filing documents and statements given there will be no prejudice to the respondent in receiving the applicants' documents well in advance of the new hearing dates that the Tribunal will soon set.
Order
11The Tribunal grants the applicants' request to adjourn, and their request to extend the time for filing documents and witness statements pursuant to Rules 16 and 17 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure.
Next Steps
12The Tribunal shall issue a new Notice of Rescheduled Hearing with new hearing dates and a date by which the applicants must file their witness statements and documents upon which they intend to rely at the hearing.
13I am not seized.
Dated at Toronto, this 6th day of October, 2017.
"Signed by"
Mary Truemner Vice-chair