Bogar v. March Ford Inc., 2017 HRTO 1516

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

James Bogar

Applicant

-and-

March Ford Inc., 1554077 Ontario Inc., and Mitch Coutu

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Brian Cook

Date: November 20, 2017

Citation: 2017 HRTO 1516

Indexed as: Bogar v. March Ford Inc.

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

James Bogar, Applicant

George Walker, Paralegal

March Ford Inc. and 1554077 Ontario Inc., and Mitch Coutu, Respondents

Robert Onley, Counsel

1This Application alleges discrimination with respect to employment because of family status contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended. The applicant has also filed a related statement of claim in Court. The respondents submit that the Application should be dismissed because of the related action in Court and also on the grounds that the respondents believe the Application has no reasonable prospect of success.

2The applicant does not agree that the Application should be dismissed. In his submissions, he also addressed the question of whether the Application should be deferred because of the related action in Court. He opposes deferral.

3Deferral of an application ensures that proceedings dealing with the same issues do not run at the same time, to reduce the possibility of inconsistent decisions on facts or law.

4Some of the factors that may be relevant in deciding whether to defer consideration of an application before the Tribunal are the subject matter of the other proceeding, the nature of the other proceeding, the type of remedies available in the other proceeding, and whether it would be fair overall to the parties to, having regard to the status of each proceeding and the steps that have been taken to pursue them.

5In my view, this Application must be deferred until the conclusion of the proceeding currently before the Court. While the legal arguments in both proceedings may be somewhat distinct, the underlying history is essentially the same. The respondent advises that court dates have been set for January.

6If the applicant wishes to pursue the Application after the proceeding before the Court is concluded, he may file a Request for Order During Proceedings asking that the Application be re-activated. He must do so within 60 days of the conclusion of the Court proceeding. At that time, the Tribunal can assess whether the Court proceeding has appropriately dealt with the substance of the Application and whether the Application should be dismissed as having no reasonable prospect of success.