COURT FILE NO.: 701/01
DATE: 20030909
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
cunningham a.c.j., dunnet and coo jj.
B E T W E E N:
GEORGE MIANOWSKI
Applicant
- and -
ONTARIO HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION and LEVER POND’S, A Division of U.L. CANADA, INC.
Respondents
Thomas J. Gorsky, for the Applicant
Prabhu Rajan, for the Ontario Human Rights Commission
Douglas K. Gray, for the Respondent, Lever Pond’s A Division of U.L. Canada, Inc.
HEARD: September 9, 2003
DUNNET J.: (Orally)
[1] The applicant moves to strike the respondent Lever Pond’s affidavit and attachments which were not before the Commissioner. The record that goes before the Court hearing an application for judicial review should essentially be the material that was before the Commissioner. See Ontario Hydro v. Ontario (Assistant and Privacy Commissioner), [1996] O.J. No. 4196 (Div. Ct.).
[2] In our view, the affidavit is not submitted in respect of jurisdictional error, but rather, it serves to expand or augment the record relating to the applicant’s conduct. If the Commissioner had wanted to view the attachments to the affidavit, they would have formed part of the record. Therefore, we are not persuaded that in the circumstances of this case, we should exercise our discretion to admit the affidavit. The motion is allowed.
CUNNINGHAM A.C. J.
DUNNET J.
COO J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: September 9, 2003
Date of Release: September 23, 2003
COURT FILE NO.: 701/01
DATE: 20030909
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
cunningham a.c.j., dunnet and
coo jj.
B E T W E E N:
GEORGE MIANOWSKI
Applicant
- and -
ONTARIO HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION and LEVER POND’S, A Division of U.L. CANADA, INC.
Respondents
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
DUNNET J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: September 9, 2003
Date of Release: September 23, 2003