1880-98-R Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 527, Applicant v. Karson Kartage & Konstruction (1994) Limited, Responding Party v. Karson Kartage & Konstruction Employees’ Association, Intervenor.
2223-98-U Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 527, Applicant v. Karson Kartage & Konstruction (1994) Limited, Karson Kartage & Konstruction Employees Association, Responding Parties.
2224-98-U Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 527, Applicant v. Karson Kartage & Konstruction (1994) Limited, Karson Kartage & Konstruction Employees Association, and Kevin Hanna, in his capacity as the President of the Karson & Konstruction Employees Association and in his personal capacity, Responding Parties.
3919-99-U Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 527, Applicant v. Karson Kartage & Konstruction (1994) Limited, Karson Kartage & Konstruction Employee Association, Responding Parties.
BEFORE: David A. McKee, Vice-Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; April 13, 2000
Board File 3919-99-U is an application made pursuant to section 96 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, S. O. 1995 ch. 1 (the “Act”). This application is directly related to issues and facts in the other three Board files, and will be dealt with by the same panel of the Board and in a co-ordinated fashion. The responding parties have filed submissions alleging that the application has been filed based on information obtained from disclosures made pursuant to undertakings given in the course of litigating the first three files. The applicant requests that the Board order the responding parties to file a response before it is obliged to respond to the allegations of a breach of the implied undertaking.
The applicant in Board File 3919-99-U is directed to respond to the submissions made by counsel to the responding parties dated April 7, 2000. Such submissions are to be filed within 15 days of the date of this decision. The applicant is directed to address the issue raised by the responding parties regarding an allegation of a breach of the implied undertaking with respect to documents produced pursuant to a demand in the course of litigation. The applicant need not respond to the submissions made in the letter of counsel for Karson Kartage and Konstruction (1994) Limited which are essentially a reply to the application. Further, the applicant should address the issue of what the Board ought to do if it finds that there has been a breach of the undertaking. The responding parties shall file any submissions they have in reply within 8 days of receipt of the applicant’s submissions.
It may be that the submissions of the applicant raise factual issues that will require a hearing. If not, the Board proposes to deal with this issue in writing. Until advised by the Board, the responding parties are not required to file a response to the application. The allegations made by the responding parties are serious matters. The Board prefers to deal first with the issue of whether or not the application ought to have been filed at all.
I am seized of these applications.
“David A. McKee”
for the Board