Joseph Di Luca

The Attorney General of Canada brought a motion to extend the suspension of a declaration of invalidity to September 30, 2014.

The extension was requested because legislation responding to the court's previous decision was still proceeding through parliament.

As the request was reasonable and consented to by all parties and the amicus curiae, the Court of Appeal granted the motion.

The appellant appealed a disposition of the Ontario Review Board.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the Board's decision was firmly rooted in the evidence, reasonable, untainted by legal error, and did not constitute a miscarriage of justice.

The appellant, who was found not criminally responsible for several offences, appealed a disposition of the Ontario Review Board ordering his detention in the Secure Forensic Service at Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences.

The appellant argued he should receive an absolute discharge and that the Board erred in applying the test for the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the Board's assessment of the evidence reasonable and concluding that the transfer to the Secure Forensic Service was actually less restrictive due to a higher staff-to-patient ratio allowing for greater freedom.

The appellant appealed an order of the Ontario Review Board detaining him in a medium security facility.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the Board's determination that the appellant posed a significant threat to public safety and that detention was the least onerous and least restrictive disposition was reasonable based on the evidence.

The appellant appealed a 2008 disposition of the Ontario Review Board, which ordered his continued detention in a medium security ward.

The Court of Appeal found ample evidence to support the Board's conclusion that the appellant remained a significant threat to public safety.

The Court declined to remit the matter for the imposition of conditions, finding the issue moot because the Board was already conducting a multifaceted hearing that would address the appellant's current circumstances and conditions.

The appeal was dismissed.