Lin v. Li, 2015 HRTO 1368

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Katherine Lin Applicant

-and-

Qing Qing Li and Jie Mei Li Respondents

RECONSIDERATION DECISION

Adjudicator: Naomi Overend Date: October 14, 2015 Citation: 2015 HRTO 1368 Indexed as: Lin v. Li

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Katherine Lin, Applicant Self-represented

Introduction

1On September 21, 2015, the Tribunal issued its Decision, 2015 HRTO 1252, dismissing this Application on the basis that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction over it. The applicant has asked the Tribunal to reconsider its Decision.

2The applicant filed this Application alleging she was harassed in the area of housing on the basis of her ancestry, place of origin, ethnic origin and reprisal. In the Decision under reconsideration, the Tribunal found that it was plain and obvious that the subject matter of the Application did not fall within the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"):

The Tribunal's jurisdiction is limited to enforcement of the Code. Therefore, to be within the Tribunal's jurisdiction an Application must contain allegations that connect a respondent's behaviour to one or more prohibited ground of discrimination. The Application and submissions deals with allegations of what appear to be violent and abusive behaviour, but on the face of these documents, there is no connection between this treatment and any ground in the Code.

THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

3The applicant checks the following reasons in her Request for Reconsideration why the Tribunal should reconsider its Decision:

1. The decision is in conflict with established case law or Tribunal procedure and the proposed reconsideration involves a matter of general or public importance; and
2. Other factors exist that outweigh the public interest in the finality of Tribunal decisions.

DECISION

4Under section 45.7 of the Code, the Tribunal may, at the request of a party or on its own initiative, reconsider its decisions in accordance with Tribunal's Rules.

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.

5The Tribunal has issued Rules of Procedure, which govern such requests, as well as a Practice Direction to provide guidance to the community on the Tribunal's exercise of its reconsideration powers (Practice Direction on Reconsideration, January 2008 amended June 2008). Rule 26 states in part:

26.1 Any party may request reconsideration of a final decision of the Tribunal within (thirty) 30 days of the date of the decision

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.

6In her Request for Reconsideration, the applicant has attached submissions that mirror those submitted in response to a Notice of Intent to Dismiss ("NOID"). The submissions on the NOID were considered in coming to the original decision that the Application was not within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.

7Although the applicant has made allegations with respect to housing, she has failed to explain why this alleged treatment occurred because of her ancestry, place of origin or ethnic origin. Moreover, she has failed to establish why this conduct would be reprisal contrary to s. 8 of the Code.

8On this Request for Reconsideration, I find that the applicant has not addressed why the decision is in conflict with established case law or Tribunal procedure or established that there are factors that outweigh the public interest in the finality of Tribunal decisions.

9In sum, I find that the applicant has not established the existence of any of the criteria in Rule 26 that would lead to reconsideration of the Tribunal's Decision. The Request is denied.