Hans Harry der von Felix v. C.R. Laurence of Canada (Ontario), 2009 HRTO 679

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Hans Harry der von Felix

Applicant

-and-

C.R. Laurence of Canada (Ontario) and Gavin Brin

Respondents

Reconsideration DECISION

Adjudicator: David Muir

Date: May 25, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 679

Indexed as: der von Felix v. C.R. Laurence of Canada (Ontario)

1This Decision addresses a Request for reconsideration of the Tribunal’s Decision dismissing the Application.

2On May 20, 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.

3Rule 25 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure for Transitional Applications under Section 53(3) and 53(5) of the Code 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 applicant made no submissions in his Request that bear on any of the above factors. He actively participated in the Case Resolution Conference and presented his evidence. The evidence he tendered, including his hearsay evidence on the critical points, was admitted and considered. The applicant does not allege any new facts or evidence that could not have been obtained earlier or any other factor that outweighs the public interest in the finality of Tribunal decisions. The central submission of the applicant is that he disagrees with my findings of fact based on the evidence before me.

5The Request for reconsideration is denied.