T.A. v. The Children’s Aid Society of Toronto, 2011 HRTO 1368

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

T.A.

Applicant

-and-

The Children’s Aid Society of Toronto and Hillary Whyte

Respondents

RECONSIDERATION DECISION

Adjudicator: David A. Wright

Date: July 20, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 1368

Indexed as: T.A. v. The Children’s Aid Society of Toronto

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

T.A., Applicant ) Self-represented

1The applicant seeks reconsideration of the Tribunal’s decision, 2011 HRTO 189, dismissing the Application following a summary hearing. As against Hillary Whyte, the Tribunal held that the Application was barred by s. 72(7) of the Child and Family Services Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.11. As against the Children’s Aid Society of Toronto, the Tribunal held that there was no reasonable basis on which the alleged actions of the respondent could be linked to the prohibited grounds of family status or creed.

2The grounds for reconsideration are limited, and are set out in Rule 26.5 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice. The applicant argues that there are new facts and evidence that could potentially be determinative of the case and that could not reasonably have been obtained earlier (Rule 26.5(a)), and that other factors exist that outweigh the public interest in the finality of Tribunal decisions (Rule 26.5(d)).

3In support of his request the applicant states:

I have only recently obtained copies of the coroner’s report that indicates the death of my youngest son had causative factors that contradicts Dr. Au’s findings. I am in the process of extracting the pertinent parts necessary to submit to the Tribunal.

I have recently obtained medical notes from the Hospital for Sick [Children], plus other information that questions Dr. Au’s and Hillary Whyte’s inference of rickets in my [son] and am also in the process of documenting it for the Tribunal.

4The Tribunal’s decision had nothing to do with whether the medical findings or inferences of any of these individuals were correct. Rather, it was based on the fact that Dr. Whyte cannot, under the law, be found liable for making a report to the Children’s Aid Society, and that there was no basis to connect the respondents’ actions to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended. The information the applicant states he has recently found has no bearing on either of these conclusions. As such, even assuming it was appropriate to take this information into consideration, it would not affect the Tribunal’s conclusions.

5The Request for Reconsideration is dismissed.