HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Linda De Rose
Applicant
-and-
Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board and Jim Minello
Respondents
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Josée Bouchard
Indexed as: De Rose v. Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Linda De Rose, Applicant
James A. Renaud, Counsel
Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board and Jim Minello, Respondents
Brian P. Nolan, Counsel
Ontario English Catholic Teachers Association, Affected Person
Bernard A. Hanson, Counsel
background
1By Application filed on October 25, 2010, the applicant alleges that the respondents discriminated against her in employment contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H. 19, as amended (the “Code”).
2This Interim Decision addresses the applicant’s September 20, 2017 Request for an Order During Proceedings seeking clarification of the role of the bargaining agent, the Ontario English Catholic Teachers Association (“OECTA”), in the proceeding. More specifically, the applicant requests the following:
a. An Order declaring that OECTA is either a party or is not a party to these proceedings;
b. If OECTA is determined to be a party, an Order directing that it provide the same information and follow all other directions set out in the Case Assessment Direction of July 18, 2017, on the same timeframes as the applicant and respondents;
c. If OECTA is not declared to be a party, an Order that it be removed as addressee and/or participant in any proceeding as scheduled or to be scheduled;
d. Such further and other Order as the Tribunal may be requested and determines is just and reasonable in the circumstances.
3On September 21, 2017, the OECTA filed submissions indicating that it is not named as a respondent to the Application and has never filed a request to intervene in the matter. It confirms that it has no intention of seeking intervention status in this matter.
4On October 4, 2017, the respondents filed a Response to a Request for an Order taking no position with respect to the applicant’s request.
analysis and decision
5The Tribunal has considered the OECTA as an affected person in this proceeding. Pursuant to Rule 3.14 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure, the affected person may apply to intervene in the proceeding. If the affected person seeks to intervene, the Tribunal determines the extent to which that person/organization may participate in the proceeding. If the affected person does not request to intervene, the Tribunal may proceed with the Application without further notice to the person/organization.
6The OECTA has clearly indicated that it has no intention of seeking intervention status in this matter. Consequently, pursuant to Rule 3.14 of the Rules of Procedure, the Tribunal shall proceed without further notice to the OECTA.
order
7The Tribunal orders that The OECTA shall receive no further notices of the proceedings in this Application.
Dated at Toronto, this 17th day of October, 2017.
“Signed by”
Josée Bouchard
Vice-chair