CTA Home : Rulings : Interlocutory Decisions : 2002

Interlocutory Decisions : 2002

2002-01-16

LET-AT-R-11-2002

File No. U3570/00-81

In its Decision No. LET-AT-R-5-2002 dated January 8, 2002, the Canadian Transportation Agency (Agency) indicated that it would issue directions establishing the time frames for the filing of further submissions by the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD) and VIA Rail Canada Inc. (VIA), as well as whether final oral argument will be heard by the Agency. Following the issuance of this Decision, CCD requested in a letter dated January 10, 2002, that the Agency direct VIA to respond to supplementary interrogatories.

CCD's supplementary interrogatories

The Agency is of the opinion that the supplementary interrogatories contained in CCD's latest submission are not relevant to the Agency's investigation of CCD's application filed pursuant to subsection 172(1) of the Canada Transportation Act (CTA). However, depending on the nature of the submissions filed by the parties and particularly by VIA, the Agency may determine that some of these interrogatories have become relevant to its investigation and direct VIA to provide more detailed answers.

Issues raised by CCD

In its application dated December 4, 2000, CCD listed six preliminary conclusions and submitted that they represent both violations of the Agency Passenger Rail Car Accessibility and Terms and Conditions of Carriage by Rail of Persons with Disabilities Code of Practice and undue obstacles to the mobility of persons with disabilities. Since the filing of its application, CCD has raised further issues concerning the accessibility of certain features of the Renaissance cars to persons with disabilities. These issues are set out in various submissions that have been filed by CCD over the course of these proceedings.

In the interest of ensuring that the parties are clear as to the issues that are presently before it, the Agency has compiled the following list of issues raised by CCD during the course of these proceedings.

A) Coach cars

1. Aisle width
2. Floor level variations and movable aisle armrest
3. Wheelchair tie-down
4. Space for service animals
5. Washrooms

B) Service cars

1. Vestibule outside "accessible suite"
2. Accessible Suite
3. Washroom and features
4. Aisle width

C) Sleeper cars

1. Bedrooms
2. Washroom and features
3. Aisle width

D) General issues involving all of the cars

1. Doors
2. Stairs
3. Gap between cars and platforms - bridge plate and boarding lifts
4. "Electro-luminescent" light for emergency exit
5. Onboard services
6. Train consists
7. Crumple zone or crash energy management zone
8. Diaphragms

CCD and VIA are requested to use this structure in all future submissions.

Further procedural matters

In its letter dated November 9, 2001, VIA requests that, after all evidence has been completed in this case, the Agency direct the parties to file written argument, followed by oral argument.

In its response dated November 15, 2001, CCD opposes the requested oral argument as unnecessary and extravagant. CCD adds that, once VIA has fully responded to CCD's written interrogatories, CCD hopes to be permitted to file its expert evidence with the Agency. In addition, VIA would reasonably expect to be afforded an opportunity to submit responding evidence.

CCD submits that, thereafter, the parties should be permitted to make final written submissions, respond and reply on all issues including submissions on the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and then the Agency is respectfully requested to reach its decision.

Due to the unique nature of this application, combined with the numerous submissions made by the parties in this case, it is the Agency's opinion that it would be beneficial to the Panel to add an oral component to its deliberations. The Agency, taking into account that legal counsel for both parties are located in Toronto, and in consideration of the limited resources of CCD, will hear final oral arguments in Toronto.

In setting out below the procedures and time frames for the filing of further submissions, the Agency has taken into consideration the submissions made by VIA and CCD.

- CCD is required to file its final submission, including any expert evidence that it expects to file, concerning the issues it has raised, as set out above, by January 30, 2002.
- VIA is required to file its answer by February 11, 2002.
- CCD is required to file its reply by February 18, 2002.
- Final oral argument will be heard by the Agency at the end of February 2002 in Toronto at a date, time and location to be confirmed at a later date.