HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Aswani Cherukuri
Applicant
-and-
Diversified Transportation Ltd. o/a Milton Transit
Respondent
RECONSIDERATION DECISION
Adjudicator: Jennifer Scott
Indexed as: Cherukuri v. Diversified Transportation Ltd. o/a Milton Transit
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Diversified Transportation Ltd. o/a Milton Transit, Respondent
Richard Nixon, Counsel
1On November 16, 2016, the respondent filed a Request for Reconsideration of an Interim Decision in this matter, 2016 HRTO 1346, dated October 17, 2016 (the "Interim Decision"). In the Interim Decision, the Tribunal denied the respondent's request to dismiss the Application on a preliminary basis and granted the applicant's request to amend the Application by adding additional grounds of discrimination and particulars regarding the applicant's ethnic background.
2The Request for Reconsideration is dismissed for the following reasons.
3Rule 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" (emphasis added).
4The 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.
5The Tribunal's Practice Direction on Reconsideration begins with the following statements:
Parties may ask the HRTO to reconsider a final decision. The HRTO may also reconsider a decision on its own initiative where it considers it appropriate.
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.
Examples of situations where the HRTO has reconsidered its decision are:
where a party, through no fault of its own, did not receive notice of a hearing or request for submissions; or
where exceptional factors exist that outweigh the public interest in the finality of decisions including inconsistencies in the HRTO's case law.
Analysis and Decision
6Rule 26 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure provides that any party may request reconsideration of a final decision of the Tribunal within 30 days of the date of the decision. An Interim Decision may be considered "final" for the purpose of a reconsideration request if it disposes of some or all of the central issues in an application. See Matthews v. Toronto Police Service, 2011 HRTO 354.
7In this case, the Interim Decision has not disposed of any of the issues in the Application. It has simply allowed the Application to proceed to a hearing. As was stated in the Interim Decision, the respondent is free to renew its dismissal request at the hearing. Because the Interim Decision has not disposed of any of the issues in the Application, it is not a final decision and not subject to reconsideration.
Order
8The Request for Reconsideration is denied.
Dated at Toronto, this 9^th^ day of December, 2016.
"Signed By"
Jennifer Scott
Vice-chair```