HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Shyesh Alturki
Applicant
-and-
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Transportation
Respondent
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Jo-Anne Pickel Date: October 27, 2017 Citation: 2017 HRTO 1424 Indexed as: Alturki v. Ontario (Transportation)
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Shyesh Alturki, Applicant
Hassan Ahmad, Counsel
1The applicant filed an Application alleging discrimination contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H. 19 as amended (the “Code”). Specifically, the applicant alleged that the respondent’s policy relating to the exemption from the one year waiting period found in the Highway Traffic Act discriminates against him because of ethnic origin, place of origin and citizenship.
2Another applicant had filed an Application (File No. 2017-26876-I) relating to this same issue and that Application was scheduled to be heard November 29-30, 2017. The applicant’s counsel requested that the Tribunal substitute Mr. Alturki for the applicant in the other Application. However, the Tribunal advised him that this was not possible. The applicant’s counsel has filed this new Application along with a Request to Expedite the Application so that it is scheduled for the November 29-30 dates vacated by the withdrawal of Application 2017-26876-I. Unfortunately, as the Tribunal has already advised the applicant’s counsel, the November 29-30, 2017 hearing dates had to be cancelled when Application 2017-26876-I was withdrawn. Therefore, it is not possible to schedule this new Application into those dates.
3I am not convinced that it is appropriate to expedite this Application. Under Rule 21.2.1 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure, the Tribunal need not provide reasons when it denies a request to expedite an Application. Therefore, I limit myself to the following comments. The main reason provided by the applicant for expediting the Application is that, in his submission, it will become moot and the applicant will no longer be entitled to a remedy if the matter is not heard before March 21, 2018. That is the date on which the one-year waiting period would expire for the applicant to obtain his full G license. I note that this is not necessarily the case under the Tribunal’s mootness case law. See for example Cole v. Ontario (Health and Long-Term Care), 2015 HRTO 1604. Therefore, I am not persuaded that this reason or the other reasons provided by the applicant justify expediting this case.
Order
4The applicant’s Request to Expedite this Application is denied. However, the parties can offer the parties an expedited mediation if they are both interested in that option. Both parties must write to the Tribunal within 7 days of this Interim Decision to advise whether they are interested in participating in an expedited mediation in this case.
Dated at Toronto, this 27^th^ day of October, 2017.
“Signed by”
Jo-Anne Pickel
Vice-chair```