Richard Banigan v. Sheridan College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning, 2010 HRTO 1150

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

BETWEEN:

Richard Banigan Applicant

-and-

Sheridan College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: David Muir Date: May 20, 2010 Citation: 2010 HRTO 1150 Indexed as: Banigan v. Sheridan College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning

1This is an Application dated June 8, 2009 under section 53(5) of Part VI of the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"). The underlying complaint was filed with the Ontario Human Rights Commission on April 8, 2007 (the "Complaint").

2The central allegation in the Complaint is that the applicant has been subject to reprisal by the respondent for having filed prior human rights complaints. The allegations of reprisal are largely in reference to a considerable number of applications for employment with various Community College employers going back over 20 years that the applicant alleges were influenced either directly or indirectly by the respondent. Although framed primarily as a reprisal complaint, there are many allegations made with respect to other events including the termination of the applicant's employment with the respondent in 1985.

3This Decision deals with a Request for Reconsideration of my Interim Decision, 2010 HRTO 621, in which I narrowed the scope of the issues to be addressed at the hearing on the basis that a number of allegations made in the Complaint had previously been disposed of by the Commission or were out of time. I also concluded that significant elements of the Complaint underlying the Application amounted to a collateral attack on an arbitration decision from the mid 1980's in which the applicant participated and amounted to an abuse of process. The applicant takes issue with all of these conclusions.

4Section 45.7 of the Code provides as follows:

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.

5The Tribunal's Rules provide that a reconsideration request may be made in respect of a final decision of the Tribunal. A final decision is one that "disposes of some or all of the central issues in the complaint as between the parties": Sigrist and Carson v. London District Catholic School Board, 2008 HRTO 34, at para. 41. None of the determinations made in the Interim Decision at issue is in any sense final, and on that basis the request for reconsideration ought to be dismissed. Although the scope of the issues raised was narrowed, there was no final determination of the rights of either party.

6Accordingly, and for the reasons set out above, the Request for Reconsideration is dismissed.