HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Louise Cartier Applicant
-and-
Marilyn Nairn Respondent
RECONSIDERATION DECISION
Adjudicator: Sheri D. Price Date: June 3, 2010 Citation: 2010 HRTO 1266 Indexed as: Cartier v. Nairn
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Louise Cartier, Applicant on her own behalf
1On January 13, 2010, the applicant filed a Request for Reconsideration of the Tribunal’s December 17, 2009 Decision 2009 HRTO 2208, dismissing her Application. The applicant’s Request is filed pursuant to s. 45.7(1) of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended.
2Rule 26.5 of the Tribunal’s Rules states that 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.
3These four circumstances are also set out in section 2 of the Request for Reconsideration Form, which states: “Please check the reasons why you are making this Request for Reconsideration. Check all that apply.” In her Request, the applicant checked off the boxes for a), c) and d).
4The applicant’s Request does not identify any new facts or evidence relevant to the Decision, allege that the Decision conflicts with established jurisprudence, or put forward any other factors that outweigh the public interest in the finality of decisions. Rather, in her written submissions, the applicant indicates that she disagrees with the Decision and reiterates her disagreement with the respondent labour arbitrator’s decision in her discharge grievance. This is not a basis for Reconsideration.
5Accordingly, the Request for Reconsideration is denied.
Dated at Toronto this 3rd day of June, 2010.
”signed by”_____________
Sheri Price Vice-chair