HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Rajoo Makhi
-and-
Thunder Bay Police Association, James Mauro, Patricia Hnatiw and Timo Makelainen
Respondents
RECONSIDERATION DECISION
Adjudicator: Kaye Joachim
Indexed as: Makhi v. Thunder Bay Police Association
[1] This Decision addresses a Request for reconsideration of the Tribunal’s Case Resolution Conference Decision dismissing the Application on the basis that the decision is in conflict with established case law or Tribunal procedure and the proposed reconsideration involves a matter of general or public importance, and that other factors exist that outweigh the public interest in the finality of Tribunal decisions.
[2] On July 3, 2009, the applicant filed a Request for reconsideration under section 45.7 of the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c.H.19, as amended, (the “Code”).
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.
3Under section 45.7 of the Code, the Tribunal may, at the request of a party or on its own initiative, reconsider a final decision in accordance with the Tribunal’s Rules. The Tribunal has issued rules governing such requests as well as a Practice Direction to provide guidance to the community on the Tribunal’s exercise of its reconsideration powers (Practice Direction on Reconsideration, January 2008 amended June 2008).
4The Tribunal’s Practice Direction on Reconsideration begins with the following statements:
Decisions of the Tribunal are generally considered final and are not subject to appeal. However, parties may request that the Tribunal reconsider a final decision it has made. Reconsideration is a discretionary remedy; there is no right to have a decision reconsidered by the Tribunal. Generally, the Tribunal will only reconsider a decision where it finds that there are compelling and extraordinary circumstances for doing so and where these circumstances outweigh the public interest in finality of orders and decisions.
Reconsideration is not an appeal or an opportunity for a party to repair deficiencies in the presentation of its case.
[5] The Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure for Transitional Applications provide that any party may request reconsideration of a final decision in accordance with the Rules. Rule 26.5 of the Rules 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.
[6] I dismissed the Application on the basis that an applicant may not file a transitional Application after the reconsideration decision has been issued by the Ontario Human Rights Commission. For the reasons set out in my decision, this finding is consistent with the Tribunal’s jurisprudence.
[7] The applicant submitted that I failed to take into account the circumstances surrounding the timing of the filing of his Application, and specifically his argument that the Tribunal staff delayed in providing assistance to him. Contrary to his assertion, I set out in detail the applicant’s assertions and arguments and dealt with them in my decision. Reconsideration is not an opportunity to re-argue one’s case.
[8] The Request for reconsideration is denied.
Dated at Toronto, this 27th day of July, 2009.
“Signed by”
Kaye Joachim
Alternate Chair