Anu Bakshi

This decision addresses a motion for leave to intervene in an appeal concerning a s. 15 Charter challenge to COVID-19 benefit programs.

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) and the Income Security Advocacy Centre (ISAC) sought leave to intervene as friends of the court.

The appellant consented to both interventions, while the respondent opposed ISAC's motion.

The court granted both motions, finding that both interveners would provide unique and useful contributions, particularly on issues of remedy, retroactive application of invalidity declarations, and the application of substantive equality analysis in the context of disability and income security programs.

The South Asian Legal Clinic of Ontario (SALCO) brought a motion for leave to intervene as a friend of the court in an appeal from a decision of the Social Benefits Tribunal.

The underlying appeal concerned the cancellation of the appellant's social benefits on the basis that she was not living as a single person, raising issues of gender-based violence and culturally competent assessments of marital relationships.

The court granted the motion, finding that SALCO had a real, substantial, and identifiable interest in the appeal and could provide a unique and distinct perspective without causing undue delay or prejudice to the parties.

The appellant insurer appealed a Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) decision ordering it to pay for disputed chiropractic treatment plans once incurred.

The insurer argued the LAT lacked jurisdiction to order payment for expenses not yet incurred prior to the hearing.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the LAT has broad remedial powers to determine entitlement to benefits, and requiring claimants to self-fund disputed treatments before accessing the LAT would defeat the consumer protection purpose of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.