Alexopoulos v. Toronto Parking Authority, 2009 HRTO 1751

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Simar Alexopoulos

Applicant

-and-

Toronto Parking Authority, Octavio Costa, Sam Roussos and Sukhdev Singh

Respondents

RECONSIDERATION DECISION

Adjudicator: Kaye Joachim

Date: October 22, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 1751

Indexed as: Alexopoulos v. Toronto Parking Authority

1This Decision addresses a Request for Reconsideration of the Tribunal’s Decision 2009 HRTO 1493 dismissing the Application on the basis that the applicant had filed a civil action effectively claiming damages for a breach of the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c.H.19, as amended, (the “Code”).

2On October 19, 2009, the applicant filed a Request for reconsideration under section 45.7 of 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.

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 complaint filed with the Ontario Human Rights Commission on August 2, 2006 and abandoned upon filing the present Application on June 2, 2009 alleged that the applicant began experiencing problems at work after he was diagnosed with a disability in 2004 and that his employment was terminated in 2006.

5On February 7, 2008, the applicant filed a civil action for wrongful dismissal alleging virtually identical facts. He specifically alleges that the respondents breached their obligations under the Code.

6In his Request for Reconsideration, the applicant seeks to amend and expand his Application to include additional allegations of discrimination. It is not open to the applicant to amend an Application that has been dismissed. The Request for Reconsideration does not address in any way the civil action, which was the reason the Application was dismissed.

7The Request for reconsideration is denied.