The Ontario Jockey Club v. Service Employees International Union, Local 204; Joe Zaher, Inspector; and Ministry of Labour
File No.: 3609-00-HS Date: October 26, 2001 Ontario Labour Relations Board
Before: Harry Freedman, Vice-Chair
DECISION OF THE BOARD
1The appellant filed an appeal under section 61 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.O.1 as amended (the "OHSA") of the orders made by Inspector Joe Zaher on February 5, 2001 in Field Visit No. 976774 (the "Order"). The appellant also applied for a suspension of the Order (Board File No. 3610-00-HS) pending the disposition of the appeal. That application was dismissed by the Board by decision dated March 28, 2001. The appeal is pending before the Board.
2The Registrar, by notice to the parties dated September 18, 2001, fixed November 23, 2001 as the date for the hearing of this appeal. Counsel for the Inspector and the Ministry of Labour, by letter to the Board dated September 21, 2001 (which referred to Board File No. 3610-00-HS and not this appeal) requested an adjournment of the hearing of this appeal on the grounds that charges related to the appeal were laid under the OHSA against the appellant and a supervisor and those charges are currently pending before the Ontario Court of Justice. Counsel submits that if the hearing of the appeal takes place before the matter pending in the Ontario Court of Justice is concluded, the appellant or the Crown may be prejudiced in those court proceedings. Counsel requests that the hearing of this appeal be adjourned to a date following the conclusion of those matters in the Ontario Court of Justice.
3Counsel for the Inspector and the Ministry of Labour did not indicate whether she had discussed her request with the other parties to the appeal. It is unclear whether the Registrar's office, after receiving that September 21st letter, sought to determine whether the other parties had any objection to the adjournment, as the file remained with the Registrar's Office until counsel for the Ministry of Labour and the Inspector, by letter dated October 22, 2001 requested that the Board make a decision about the earlier request for an adjournment. Counsel for the appellant, by letter dated October 23, 2001 advised that the appellant did not object to its appeal being adjourned sine die. No comment has been received from the other responding party although it had received copies of the September and October letters that had been sent by counsel for the Ministry of Labour and the Inspector. I also note that it did not make any submissions with respect to the application for the suspension of the Order.
4Having regard to the prompt request for an adjournment made by counsel for the Ministry of Labour and the Inspector and to her submissions in support of the request and as the appellant does not object to the adjournment, I am satisfied that the hearing of this appeal should be adjourned, despite the absence of consent from the other responding party.
DISPOSITION
5Based on the submissions of counsel, the hearing of this appeal is adjourned sine die for a period not exceeding one year from the date of this decision. Unless a party to this appeal requests that the Board proceed with the appeal within that one year period, the appeal will be deemed to have been dismissed without any further notice to the parties.
"Harry Freedman"
for the Board