Wayne Widdis v. Great West Life Realty Inc., 2012 HRTO 1385

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Wayne Widdis

Applicant

-and-

Great West Life Realty Inc.

Respondent

RECONSIDERATION DECISION

Adjudicator: Douglas Sanderson

Date: July 13, 2012

Citation: 2012 HRTO 1385

Indexed as: Widdis v. Great West Life Realty Inc.

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Wayne Widdis, Applicant

Self-represented

1The applicant requests Reconsideration of the Tribunal’s Decision of May 2, 2012, 2012 HRTO 871 dismissing this Application as abandoned.

2In an Interim Decision in this matter, 2012 HRTO 488, I found the applicant had pointed to sufficient evidence to avoid a finding that his allegations of racial harassment in his Application had no reasonable prospect of success, but dismissed the other allegations in the Application. Most of the surviving allegations were untimely. Consequently, I directed the applicant to file submissions particularizing when he was subjected to racial harassment and to explain why these allegations are timely pursuant to sections 34(1) and 34(2) of the Code within 14 days of the date of the Interim Decision, which was March 7, 2012. The applicant filed no submissions; therefore, I dismissed the Application as abandoned and that there was no basis for concluding that the surviving allegations were timely.

3The circumstances in which reconsideration may be granted are set out in Rule 26.5:

26.5 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 Tribunal’s Practice Direction on Reconsideration begins with the following statements:

Decisions of the Tribunal are generally considered final and are not subject to appeal. However, parties may request that the Tribunal reconsider a final decision it has made. Reconsideration is a discretionary remedy; there is no right to have a decision reconsidered by the Tribunal. Generally, the Tribunal will only reconsider a decision where it finds that there are compelling and extraordinary circumstances for doing so and where these circumstances outweigh the public interest in finality of orders and decisions.

Reconsideration is not an appeal or an opportunity for a party to repair deficiencies in the presentation of its case.

5The applicant filed a Request for Reconsideration on May 28, 2012, but did not provide any reason for reconsideration. In these circumstances, there are no compelling or extraordinary circumstances for reconsidering the Decision.

6The Request for Reconsideration is dismissed.