Nicole Smith

The respondents requested that the human rights application be dismissed under section 45.1 of the Code, arguing that the WSIB had already determined the applicant did not have a disability.

The Tribunal dismissed this request, noting that claiming WSIB benefits meets the Code's definition of disability.

The Tribunal also denied the respondents' alternative request to defer the matter pending a WSIAT appeal, and denied the applicant's request to adjourn the hearing due to delayed medical records, finding no extraordinary circumstances.

The respondent in a human rights application alleging disability discrimination requested an order for the production of the applicant's entire medical file from his physician.

The applicant opposed the request, arguing it was too late, overly broad, and raised privacy concerns.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's medical condition was in issue, making the medical records arguably relevant.

However, the Tribunal agreed the request was overly broad and ordered the applicant to produce the medical file limited to the relevant time period from the date of the original injury in September 2012 to the present.

In an interim decision regarding an application alleging employment discrimination based on disability, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario addressed three requests for orders during proceedings brought by the respondents.

The Tribunal deferred the respondents' request to have witnesses testify by telephone, noting they were not required for the initial hearing dates.

The Tribunal excluded a news release about the organizational respondent's past convictions as irrelevant to the current proceedings.

Finally, the Tribunal ordered the applicant to produce all documents related to his Employment Insurance claims, finding them arguably relevant to the remedies sought.

The applicant filed a Request for Order During Proceedings seeking to amend his human rights application to add factual details, list new witnesses, and increase the remedy sought.

The respondents opposed the request, arguing prejudice, untimeliness, and that the amendments expanded the scope of the hearing.

The Tribunal granted the request, finding that the amendments did not significantly expand the scope of the original allegations of disability discrimination and failure to accommodate, and that the request was made at an early stage of the proceeding.