Kern v. Human Resources Capital Group, 2011 HRTO 443

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Jaime Kern

Applicant

-and-

Human Resources Capital Group Inc. o/a Spherion Workforce Architects and Krista Drake

Respondents

Reconsideration Decision

Adjudicator: David Muir

Date: March 2, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 443

Indexed as: Kern v. Human Resources Capital Group

1This is an Application filed under section 53(5) of Part VI of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”). The Application was dismissed in 2011 HRTO 144.

2On February 22, 2011, the applicant filed a Request for Reconsideration (“Request”) pursuant to 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 receipt of a 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 also provides that 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:

4A 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.

5Although the applicant states that she is relying on paragraph 2(c) above there are no submissions made which engage that provision In her submissions the applicant takes issue with the ultimate result and makes submissions which question the findings of fact that were made as well as my conclusions on the law.

6A Request for reconsideration is not an appeal or an opportunity to re-argue a case. The fact that a party disagrees with the result of a decision is insufficient. This Request engages none of the required factors set out in Rule 25 above.

7For these reasons the Request is dismissed.