Alexi N. Wood

The applicant, a doctoral student, sought judicial review of a university tribunal's decision finding he violated the student code of conduct due to disruptive behaviour towards his supervisor.

The tribunal imposed restrictions on his contact with the supervisor and access to the laboratory.

The applicant also sought an order of mandamus to compel the university to provide him with a new supervisor.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding that the tribunal accorded the applicant procedural fairness and that the restrictions were within the adjudicator's authority.

The court also declined to issue mandamus, as the applicant had no clear legal right to be provided with a supervisor against a professor's will.

The appellant appealed two summary judgments dismissing her medical negligence claims against two psychiatrists.

The motion judges found that the appellant failed to provide expert evidence from a qualified psychiatrist to establish a breach of the standard of care, whereas the respondents provided expert evidence that they met the standard.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals, confirming that without expert psychiatric evidence, the appellant's claims had no hope of success.

The appellants appealed the dismissal of their medical malpractice action following the death of their infant son from a bowel obstruction shortly after being discharged from the emergency room.

The trial judge had made adverse credibility findings against the appellants, accepted the respondent physician's evidence, and relied on the respondent's expert opinion that the standard of care was met.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error in the trial judge's factual findings or his assessment of the expert evidence regarding the standard of care.