Way v. Toronto Catholic District School Board, 2011 HRTO 616

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Margaret Way

Applicant

-and-

Toronto Catholic District School Board, Kevin Kobus and William Jesty

Respondents

RECONSIDERATION DECISION

Adjudicator: Kaye Joachim

Date: March 30, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 616

Indexed as: Way v. Toronto Catholic District School Board

1This Decision addresses a Request for reconsideration of the Tribunal’s Decision dated February 9, 2010, 2010 HRTO 288, dismissing the Application.

2On March 9, 2011, the applicant filed a Request for Order during Proceedings seeking to “appeal” the Decision. I am treating this as 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 Request was made over one year after the decision was issued, well past the 30 day deadline for filing such requests. The applicant explained that she was devastated by the Decision dismissing her Application. This is the only explanation for the delay. I see no reason to exercise my discretion to permit a late Request for reconsideration. The applicant has also not set out any basis for reconsidering the Decision.

5The applicant also sought an order that the Decision be removed from the public record and, if re-issued, be anonymized. The applicant has not offered any reasons for such an extraordinary Request. It is denied.

6The Request for reconsideration is denied.