McKinney v. Metro Ontario Inc., 2011 ONSC 3601
CITATION: McKinney v. Metro Ontario Inc., 2011 ONSC 3601
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 594/10
DATE: 20110708
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
SWINTON, LOW AND HOURIGAN JJ.
BETWEEN:
CHRISTINA MCKINNEY
Applicant
– and –
METRO ONTARIO INC. and RETAIL WHOLESALE CANADA/CANADIAN AUTO WORKERS UNION, LOCAL 414
Respondents
Timothy Bingham, for the Applicant
Christina McKinney, In Person
Jeffrey M. Andrew, for the Respondent, Retail Wholesale Canada/Canadian Auto Workers Union, Local 414
Margaret Leighton, for the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
Christine M. O’Donohue and Nafisah Chowdhury, for the Respondent, Metro Ontario Inc.
HEARD at Toronto: June 8, 2011
SWINTON J. (ORALLY)
[1] This application for judicial review seeks to quash two determinations of the Human Rights Tribunal: first, to defer the hearing of the applicant’s human rights complaint until her grievance has been disposed of under the collective agreement grievance procedure; and second, to add the applicant’s union as an intervenor, pursuant to s.36 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended.
[2] The application seeks to quash interlocutory decisions. While the applicant argues that the decision to defer hearing the complaint is final, all the Tribunal has done is to postpone its consideration of the complaint in accordance with s.45 of the Code, which states that the Tribunal may defer an application in accordance with the Tribunal rules. Rule 14.1 provides:
The Tribunal may defer consideration of an Application, on such terms as it may determine, on its own initiative, at the request of an Applicant under Rule 7, or at the request of any party.
[3] This application for judicial review is premature, and there are no exceptional circumstances that would lead us to exercise our discretion to hear the application (see Ontario College of Art v. Ontario (Human Rights Commission), 1993 3430 (Div. Ct.)). We are not satisfied that there has been a loss of jurisdiction by the Tribunal.
[4] The Charter issue is not appropriately before this Court, as it was not raised before the Tribunal. Moreover, there is no evidentiary or factual basis for the Charter claim.
[5] Therefore, the application for judicial review is quashed for prematurity.
COSTS
[6] I have endorsed the Application Record, “This application is quashed for prematurity for oral reasons given today. Costs to the Union fixed at $750 and to Metro Inc. of $500. The Tribunal does not seek costs.”
SWINTON J.
LOW J.
HOURIGAN J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: June 8, 2011
Date of Release: June 30, 2011
CITATION: McKinney v. Metro Ontario Inc., 2011 ONSC 3601
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 594/10
DATE: 20110708
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
SWINTON, LOW AND HOURIGAN JJ.
BETWEEN:
CHRISTINA MCKINNEY
Applicant
– and –
METRO ONTARIO INC. and RETAIL WHOLESALE CANADA/CANADIAN AUTO WORKERS UNION, LOCAL 414
Respondents
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
SWINTON J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: June 8, 2011
Date of Release: June 30, 2011