Wade Reginald Poziomka

The applicant sought to amend her human rights application to include the ground of race.

The Tribunal granted the amendment on consent.

The Tribunal also noted a potential issue regarding whether the allegations formed a 'series of incidents' and directed the parties to provide written submissions on whether some or all of the application should be dismissed for delay under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The applicants, a married couple, alleged that the respondent church discriminated against them and subjected them to reprisal by denying them church membership.

The wife alleged reprisal for previously filing a human rights complaint against the church, while the husband alleged discrimination based on his marital status and association with his wife.

The Tribunal dismissed the applications after the applicants closed their case, finding they failed to establish a prima facie case.

The evidence showed the church deferred membership because the applicants had lived together prior to marriage, which the church sincerely believed was sinful, and because of ongoing unresolved conflicts and confrontational behaviour by the applicants, rather than for discriminatory or retaliatory reasons.

The applicant requested an adjournment of a scheduled hearing and a six-month deferral of his human rights application to explore a civil action, class action, and grievance under a collective agreement.

The Tribunal denied the adjournment request because the applicant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances as required by the Practice Direction.

The Tribunal also denied the deferral request because there was no ongoing grievance or other legal proceeding to defer to, and the matter was already at an advanced stage.