Gerarda Fournier v. Chrysler Canada Inc., 2009 HRTO 500

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Gerarda Fournier

Applicant

-and-

Chrysler Canada Inc.

Respondent

RECONSIDERATION DECISION

Adjudicator: Kaye Joachim

Date: April 24, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 500

Indexed as: Fournier v. Chrysler Canada

INTRODUCTION

1On March 16, 2009, the Tribunal issued a Decision (2009 HRTO 302) finding that the Application may not be brought to the Tribunal under section 53 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c.H-19, as amended (the “Code”).

2On April 16, 2009, the applicant filed a Request for Reconsideration of the Tribunal’s decision, as provided for in section 45.7 of the Code. The basis for the Request was that there are new facts or evidence that could potentially be determinative of the case.

3Rule 25 of the Transitional Rules provides, in part:

25.5. 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;

(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;

(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 and orders.

4Practice Direction #4 states, in part:

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.

5The applicant did not present any new facts or evidence but simply asserts that the Decision not to accept the Application is wrong.

6The Request for Reconsideration is dismissed.