Michael Moore v. Amway Canada Corporation, 2014 HRTO 1029

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Michael Moore

Applicant

-and-

Amway Canada Corporation

Respondent

RECONSIDERATION DECISION

Adjudicator: Brian Cook

Date: July 15, 2014

Citation: 2014 HRTO 1029

Indexed as: Moore v. Amway Canada Corporation

1The applicant has submitted a Request to Reconsider (“the Request”), seeking a reconsideration of Decision 2014 HRTO 761 (“the Decision”). The Decision dismissed the Application in which the applicant alleged discrimination by the respondent in regard to an unspecified request for accommodation.

2After reviewing the original Application, the Tribunal wrote to the applicant to say that the Application did not identify any specific acts of discrimination within the meaning of the Human Rights Code on the part of the respondent. The applicant was asked to clarify this. The applicant sent a letter stating that he believes that the Code does apply to his allegations but the letter did not provide any specific acts of discrimination. The Tribunal then sent the applicant a Case Assessment Direction explaining what it was he needed to tell the Tribunal. The applicant responded to this but again did not explain what it was that the respondent had done that was discriminatory and contrary to the Code.

3The Decision dismissed the Application because the applicant had not identified any alleged discrimination regarding anything this Tribunal would have the power to deal with.

4The Request explains that the request to reconsider is based on the applicant’s interpretation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Bill of Rights. This submission is similar to submissions the applicant made in the original Application.

5Rule 26.5 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure establishes what a party must show in order to have the Tribunal favourably consider a request to reconsider:

26.5 A Request for Reconsideration will not be granted unless the Tribunal is satisfied that:

there are new facts or evidence that could potentially be determinative of the case and that could not reasonably have been obtained earlier; or

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

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

other factors exist that, in the opinion of the Tribunal, outweigh the public interest in the finality of Tribunal decisions.

6None of these factors exist in this case and there is therefore no basis to reconsider the Decision. Request for Reconsideration is denied.