Carosi v. Dimmer, 2009 HRTO 1044

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Maria Carosi

Applicant

-and-

Diana Dimmer and Neil Zaph

Respondents

AND B E T W E E N:

Claudio Carosi

Applicant

-and-

Diana Dimmer and Neil Zaph

Respondents

Reconsideration DECISION

Adjudicator: David Muir

Date: July 15, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 1044

Indexed as: Carosi v. Dimmer

1The applicants have filed Requests for Reconsideration of the Tribunal’s Interim Decisions, 2009 HRTO 561 and 2009 HRTO 702, in which the Tribunal found that the complaints underlying the Applications, filed with the Ontario Human Rights Commission, were not continued against several respondents.

2Section 45.7 of the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c.H.19, as amended (the “Code”) provides as follows:

45.7 (1) Any party to a proceeding before the Tribunal may request that the Tribunal reconsider its decision in accordance with the Tribunal rules.

(2) Upon request under subsection (1) or on its own motion, the Tribunal may reconsider its decision in accordance with its rules.

3Rule 25 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure for Transitional Applications provides any party may request reconsideration of a final decision of the Tribunal within 30 days of the date of the decision. Rule 25.5 provides:

A Request for Reconsideration will not be granted unless the Tribunal is satisfied that:

a. there are new facts or evidence that could potentially be determinative of the case and that could not reasonably have been obtained earlier; or

b. the party seeking reconsideration was entitled to but, through no fault of its own, did not receive notice of the proceeding or a hearing; or

c. the decision or order which is the subject of the reconsideration request is in conflict with established jurisprudence or Tribunal procedure and the proposed reconsideration involves a matter of general or public importance; or

d. other factors exist that, in the opinion of the Tribunal, outweigh the public interest in the finality of Tribunal decisions.

4The applicants made no submissions that bear on any of the factors outlined above. In essence the applicants have attempted to re-argue the issues dealt with in the Interim Decisions above. While it is evident that the applicants do not agree with the decisions in question, that is not a proper basis for reconsideration.

5The requests for reconsideration are dismissed.