Cindy Boyd

The applicant, a person with disabilities, had used specialized transit services unconditionally for 8 years.

The respondent reviewed his eligibility and changed it to conditional, requiring him to use conventional transit for part of his trip accompanied by a personal care assistant at his own expense.

The applicant sought judicial review.

The Divisional Court found the decision unreasonable as it erected a barrier rather than removing one, contrary to the purpose of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act.

The decision was quashed and the applicant's unconditional eligibility was restored.

The appellant appealed a decision of the Social Benefits Tribunal upholding the denial of her Ontario Works benefits due to having assets in excess of the allowable limit.

The Tribunal found that the appellant owned three vehicles, the value of which exceeded the $5,000 limit for a single person.

On appeal, the appellant argued the Tribunal erred in law by equating legal ownership with the definition of an 'asset' under the Act and failing to consider if the vehicles were exempt.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the Tribunal made no error in law as the appellant failed to adduce evidence that the vehicles were inaccessible or exempt under the regulations.