HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Stanley Dwyer Applicant
-and-
Chrysler Canada Inc. Respondent
RECONSIDERATION DECISION
Adjudicator: David A. Wright
Date: April 2, 2009
Citation: 2009 HRTO 385
Indexed as: Dwyer v. Chrysler Canada
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BY
Stanley Dwyer, Applicant ) On His Own Behalf
1The applicant requests reconsideration of the Tribunal’s Decision dismissing this Application on the basis of a delay of over 30 years: Dwyer v. Chrysler Canada Inc., 2009 HRTO 247. The essence of his submissions is that his Application has merit and that he should have a hearing on the substance of his allegations. He asks the Tribunal to carefully review evidence that he suggests shows misconduct by the respondents, and errors by other agencies that have dealt with his dismissal from employment.
2Rule 26.5 of the Rules of Procedure reads as follows:
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.
3The applicant expresses strong disagreement with the Tribunal’s Decision. This is understandable. However, none of the circumstances set out in Rule 26.5 are present. In particular, reconsideration is not an opportunity to for a party to reargue the case, nor is it available simply because a party disagrees with the decision.
ORDER
4The Request for Reconsideration is dismissed.
Dated at Toronto, this 2nd day of April, 2009.
“Signed By”
David A. Wright
Vice-chair

