David C. Day

A 14-year-old Jehovah's Witness was apprehended by child protection services after refusing a potentially life-saving blood transfusion.

The applications judge ordered the transfusion under s. 25(8) of the Child and Family Services Act, which allows a court to authorize treatment in the best interests of a child under 16.

The adolescent appealed, arguing the legislation violated her Charter rights by irrebuttably presuming she lacked capacity to make medical decisions.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that the legislation is constitutional when the 'best interests' standard is interpreted as a sliding scale that gives increasingly determinative weight to the young person's views depending on their maturity.

The applicant brought a motion for reconsideration of an application for leave to appeal, arguing that the Court lacked jurisdiction to dismiss the application because one of the panel judges had retired before the judgment was released.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the motion, holding that section 41.1(1) of the Judges Act explicitly permits a retired judge to continue participating in judgments for up to six months after retirement.

Since the judgment was issued within this six-month window, the retired judge was entitled to participate.