HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Grodfred Hiamey
Applicant
-and-
Toronto Community Housing Corporation
Respondent
RECONSIDERATION DECISION
Adjudicator: Geneviève Debané
Date: October 23, 2015
Citation: 2015 HRTO 1422
Indexed as: Hiamey v. Toronto Community Housing Corporation
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Godfred Hiamey, Applicant
Self-represented
1This Application alleges discrimination with respect to housing contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”) because the applicant is in receipt of social assistance. On September 18, 2015, the Tribunal issued Decision 2015 HRTO 1240 (the “Decision”) which dismissed the Application.
2On October 15, 2015, the Tribunal received a Request to reconsider the Decision filed by the applicant. In this Request the applicant reiterates his position that I should be disqualified to determine the Application. In addition to his submissions that the Decision should be reconsidered, the applicant also reargues the issues related to his termination from employment and attached a decision from the College of Teachers and the grievance that he filed with his union.
3Under 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.
4The Tribunal’s Practice Direction on Reconsideration includes the following statements:
Reconsideration is a discretionary remedy; there is no right to have a decision reconsidered by the HRTO. Reconsideration is not an appeal or an opportunity for a party to change the way it presented its case.
5Reconsideration is a discretionary remedy. That is, while the Tribunal has the jurisdiction to reopen and reconsider its own decisions, it is not obliged to do so. It may decide when reconsideration is advisable, both through the promulgation of rules setting out conditions for the exercise of its discretion, and through the application of its discretion on a case-by-case basis.
6I find that the applicant has not met the burden of establishing any of the threshold criteria justifying reconsideration. The applicant is repeating arguments made orally before the Tribunal which I did not accept, as explained in the Decision. A request for reconsideration is not an opportunity to restate or re-argue a position already advanced and considered.
7The applicant’s request to reconsider the Application is denied.
Dated at Toronto, this 23rd day of October, 2015.
“Signed By”
Geneviève Debané
Vice-chair