HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Roger Moore
Applicant
-and-
Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Communication Safety and Correctional Services
Respondent
A N D B E T W E E N:
Randy Weaver
Applicant
-and-
Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Communication Safety and Correctional Services
Respondent
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Jo-Anne Pickel
Indexed as: Moore v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services)
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Communication Safety and Correctional Services, Respondent
Adrien Iafrate, Counsel
1This Interim Decision addresses the respondent’s request to amend its Response.
2The applicant filed an Application alleging discrimination contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H. 19, as amended. The Tribunal held a summary hearing of the Application after which it determined that the Application should continue in the Tribunal’s process.
3By Request for Order During Proceedings (“RFOP”) filed on November 23, 2017, the respondent sought to amend the Response to address allegations that the applicant raised, or particularized, for the first time at the summary hearing.
4The applicant did not respond to the applicant’s RFOP and the time for doing so has passed.
decision
5In determining requests to amend applications, the Tribunal generally considers the nature of the proposed amendments, the reasons for the amendments, the timing of the request to amend, and the prejudice to the respondent. See, for example, Odell v. TTC, [2001] OHRBID No. 2, Dube v. Canadian Career College, 2008 HRTO 336; Wozenilek v. 7-Eleven Canada Inc., 2009 HRTO 926.
6Having considered the factors set out above, I grant the respondent’s request to amend the Response. The request was not opposed by the applicant and I find that it is fair to permit the respondent to respond to allegations that were raised, or particularized, for the first time in the summary hearing.
order
7For the reasons set out above, the Tribunal orders as follows:
a. the respondent’s request to amend the Response is granted;
b. the Response is amended to include the information contained in the respondent’s November 23, 2017 RFOP; and
c. the applicant may file an amended Reply to the amendments made to the Response within 35 days of the date of this Interim Decision.
Dated at Toronto, this 28th day of December, 2017.
“Signed by”
Jo-Anne Pickel
Vice-chair