Millar v. Hydro One Networks Inc., 2017 HRTO 1574

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

James Millar Applicant

-and-

Hydro One Networks Inc. Respondent

RECONSIDERATION DECISION

Adjudicator: Esi Codjoe Date: November 29, 2017 Citation: 2017 HRTO 1574 Indexed as: Millar v. Hydro One Networks Inc.

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

James Millar, Applicant Self-represented

Introduction

1On June 8, 2017, the Tribunal issued its Decision in this Application, 2017 HRTO 640, dismissing the Application. The applicant asks that the Tribunal reconsider its Decision.

background

2The applicant filed an Application in which he alleged discrimination with respect to employment because of disability contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”).

3The Tribunal determined that the Application should be dismissed because it had no reasonable prospect of success.

the law

4Section 45.7 of the Code provides that the Tribunal may, at the request of a party, or on its own initiative, reconsider its decisions in accordance with the Tribunal’s Rules. The section reads as follows:

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.

5Further, the Tribunal has Rules that direct these requests, and a Practice Direction that guides the community regarding the Tribunal’s reconsideration powers. Rule 26 on Reconsiderations reads as follows:

26.5. A Request for Reconsideration (“Request”) 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.

6The Tribunal’s Practice Direction on Reconsideration provides the following explanation regarding the process:

Decisions of the Tribunal are generally considered final and are not subject to appeal. However, parties may request that the Tribunal reconsider a final decision it has made. Reconsideration is a discretionary remedy; there is no right to have a decision reconsidered by the Tribunal. Generally, the Tribunal will only reconsider a decision where it finds that there are compelling and extraordinary circumstances for doing so and where these circumstances outweigh the public interest in finality of orders and decisions. Reconsideration is not an appeal or an opportunity for a party to change the way it presented its case.

7The Tribunal’s Rules and Practice Direction make it clear that it will only reconsider a decision where there are compelling reasons to do so. To that end, a reconsideration is not an opportunity to restate or re-argue a case.

analylsis

8In the applicant’s Request, he checked off two reasons why he was making the Request:

• 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,

• Other factors exist that outweigh the public interest in the finality of Tribunal decisions.

9The applicant did not offer any explanation regarding the above two factors. Rather, he provided duplicate copies of information that he sent to the Tribunal as part of his Application and submissions for the Summary Hearing. Further, he restated the arguments and the remedial request that he advanced in his Application and at the Summary Hearing.

10As outlined in the Rules, Practice Direction, and Tribunal jurisprudence, a Request for a Reconsideration is not an opportunity to re-argue a case. There must be a compelling reason for the Tribunal to re-examine a decision. There is a significant public interest in ensure that a decision, once made, is final. Two such interests are; first to ensure that the parties can move on from, and end ongoing litigation; and second to avoid unnecessarily utilizing Tribunal resources. Consequently, parties are expected to treat decisions as final subject to narrow exceptions. None of the exceptions contemplated in the Rules or Practice Direction are present in this case.

order

11For the reasons stated above, the Request for Reconsideration is denied.