Demedeiros v. Ontario (Attorney General), 2013 HRTO 781

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Lina Demedeiros

Applicant

-and-

Her Majesty The Queen In Right Of Ontario As Represented By The Ministry Of The Attorney General And The Ontario Superior Court Of Justice

Respondents

RECONSIDERATION DECISION

Adjudicator: Ruth Carey

Date: May 9, 2013

Citation: 2013 HRTO 781

Indexed as: Demedeiros v. Ontario (Attorney General)

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Lina Demedeiros, Applicant

Self-represented

1On April 30, 2013 the applicant filed a Request for Reconsideration of the Tribunal’s January 9, 2013 Decision, 2013 HRTO 38, dismissing this Application on the basis that there was no connection between the alleged adverse treatment and a ground of discrimination set out in the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”).

2Rule 26.5 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure sets out the limited circumstances in which reconsideration may be granted by the Tribunal. The applicant submits that she is seeking reconsideration of the Tribunal’s decision on the basis that: the decision is in conflict with established case law or Tribunal procedure and the proposed reconsideration involves a matter of general or public importance (Rule 26.5(a)); and other factors exist that outweigh the public interest in the finality of the Tribunal decisions (Rule 26.5(d)).

3For the following reasons, the Request for Reconsideration is denied.

4First, the Request for Reconsideration is out of time. Rule 26.1 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure provides that any party may request reconsideration of a final decision of the Tribunal within 30 days from the date of the decision. The applicant first contacted the Tribunal regarding reconsideration by way of a letter received on March 1, 2013. She was referred to the Practice Direction on Reconsiderations by the Registrar as to the proper procedure. On April 30, 2013 she filed her Request for Reconsideration in Form 20.

5Pursuant to Rule 26.5.1, the Tribunal will not grant a Request for Reconsideration that is made more than 30 days following the Decision, unless the Tribunal determines that the delay in filing the Request was incurred in good faith and that no substantial prejudice will result to any person affected by the delay.

6The applicant has not given any explanation as to why her Request for Reconsideration or her initial letter were not filed within 30 days of the date of the Tribunal’s Decision so there is no basis upon which I might conclude that the delay in filing the Request was incurred in good faith. Accordingly, the Request for Reconsideration may be denied on the basis of delay alone. See der von Felix v. International Financial Data Services (Canada), 2010 HRTO 362; Hardman v. Grey County Housing, 2012 HRTO 1142; and Suarez Cadena v. e-health Ontario, 2012 HRTO 1463.

7Second, even if the Request for Reconsideration had been made in a timely manner, I would still deny it because the applicant has failed to establish the existence of any of the criteria in Rule 26.5 that might lead to reconsideration of the Tribunal’s Decision.

8Specifically, the applicant does not point to any established case law or Tribunal procedures that are in conflict with the Decision. She also does not describe any factors that would outweigh the public interest in the finality of the Tribunal’s Decision. Rather her Request for Reconsideration is about why she feels the decisions of the courts concerning her child custody and support matters were unfair.

DECISION

9The Request for Reconsideration is denied.