0037-89: Nepean Public Library Board, Applicant v. Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 2504; The Corporation of the City of Nepean, Respondents
Before: Patricia Hughes, Vice-Chair; Sharon Laing and Susan Genge, Members
Cite As: Nepean Public Library Board (1991), 2 P.E.R. 7
Practice and Procedure - Adjournments
The parties asked to adjourn the application sine die pending the release of the Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Re Haldimand-Norfolk and Ontario Nurses' Association. Adjournments sine die are a useful mechanism for permitting parties to keep a complaint or application alive while they attempt to reach a settlement. It is desirable that the Tribunal place some finite limit on an adjournment sine die, and it is not unreasonable that this limit normally consist of one year. The Tribunal adjourned the matter and advised the parties that unless one of them requested otherwise, it would terminate the matter within one year.
Pratique et procedure - Ajournements
Les parties ont convenu d'ajourner indéfiniment la requête tant que la Cour d'appel de 1'Ontario n'aurait pas rendu sa décision dans 1'affaire Haldimand-Norfolk et l'Association des infirmières et infirmiers de l'Ontario. L'ajournement indéfini constitue un mécanisme utile pour permettre aux parties de maintenir une plainte ou une requéte pendant qu'elles continuent d'en arriver à un règlement. Il est souhaitable que le Tribunal prescrive la durée des ajournements indéfinis et il n’est pas déraisonnable que cette limite soit normalement fixée à un an. Le Tribunal a ajourné 1'affaire et a informé les parties que sauf demande contraire, il y mettrait fin dans l'année.
DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL, FEBRUARY 20, 1990
1The Corporation of the City of Nepean ("the City") is added to the style of cause as Respondent.
2Nepean Public Library Board ("the Library") requested a hearing with respect to certain issues arising out of an order made by a Review Officer ("the application").
3Before the scheduled hearing into the application, the parties reached an agreement reflected in Minutes of Agreement dated January 10, 1990. In part, the parties decided to proceed on the following basis:
The matter involving the above parties at the Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal will be adjourned sine die with either or any Party able to bring it back on for hearing by giving the Pay Equity Hearing Tribunal the appropriate notice after the date of release of the Ontario Court of Appeal's decision in the Pay Equity case before it in the matter between the Ontario Nurses' Association and The Regional Municipality of Haldimand-Norfolk and others. This Agreement is subject to the ratification of these minutes of settlement [sic] by the Nepean Public Library Board and the Council of the City. The undersigned representatives of the Board and The City will recommend acceptance of this Agreement to their respective principals.
1 By letters dated January 28, 1990 and February 1, 1990, the Tribunal was advised that the Library Board and the City had ratified the agreement.
2 The agreement clearly envisages that the parties may return to the Tribunal at any time in the future. Taken literally, indeed, the provision in the agreement merely states that the parties will not come back until after the Court of Appeal's decision issues; the restriction that is set applies only to the period prior to the issuance of the decision and there is no restriction on how long may pass before any party seeks to bring the matter on for hearing.
3 Adjournments sine die are a useful mechanism for permitting parties to keep a complaint or application alive while they attempt to settle the issues involved in their dispute; should they fail to settle the dispute completely, they may return to the decision-maker without going through any prior procedures, including filing new applications or responses or, in the case of the Tribunal, going through Review Services. By their very name, adjournments sine die are adjournments to a time which is not fixed. Very often, such adjournments are the last an adjudicative body sees of the complaint. That is to the advantage of the tribunal because it permits it to free up dates, and the panel which may have been reserved to this particular case.
4The Tribunal also has an interest in knowing the state of its caseload and the status of matters before it. At some point, the parties should be required to put their minds to how they wish to proceed. It is desirable to place some finite limit on an adjournment sine die which means only that the parties have adjourned to an unspecified time, not to a time which could occur between this date and some date in infinity. It is not unreasonable that this limit normally consist of one year: thus if neither party seeks to bring on a matter which has been adjourned sine die before the expiry of a year after the granting of the adjournment, the matter will be terminated after the expiry of the year.
5Accordingly, unless we hear from the parties with an objection to this manner of proceeding and their reasons for such objection, within 21 days from the date hereof, we shall dispose of this matter as follows:
This matter will be adjourned sine die. Should neither of the parties request that the matter be brought on for hearing before the expiry of a year from the date hereof, it will be terminated by the Tribunal.