Charles A. Ocran

The applicant sought judicial review of the Ontario Human Rights Commission's decision not to refer her disability discrimination and harassment complaint to the Human Rights Tribunal.

The applicant argued the Commission's investigation was incompetent for failing to interview her physicians and relying on potentially biased employee statements.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding the investigation was thorough and not clearly deficient.

The Court held that the Commission's conclusion—that the applicant was accommodated and terminated for progressive discipline rather than discrimination—was supported by ample evidence and was not patently unreasonable.

The applicant father in a custody and support proceeding moved for summary judgment to dismiss the respondent mother's counterclaim for an interest in property.

The motions judge adjourned the summary judgment motion pending the applicant's delivery of a financial statement and transcripts.

The applicant sought leave to appeal the adjournment to the Divisional Court.

The court granted leave to appeal, finding good reason to doubt the correctness of the adjournment and noting a conflicting decision regarding the adjournment of summary judgment motions for unrelated document production.