7 total
O'Connor application for detention centre records regarding French language services dismissed for lack of likely relevance.
The self-represented applicant, facing sexual assault and other charges, brought an O'Connor application for third-party records from the Toronto South Detention Centre.
The applicant sought records relating to the provision of French language services during his pre-trial detention, arguing that inadequate services contributed to an abuse of process justifying a stay of proceedings.
The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the application, finding that the applicant failed to meet the likely relevance threshold.
The court held that inadequate French language services in a detention centre do not constitute cruel and unusual punishment under section 12 of the Charter, nor do they engage trial fairness or the integrity of the justice system under section 7 to justify a stay of proceedings.
Police officer's deceit conviction for false statements on traffic tickets upheld, but demotion penalty reduced.
The appellant, a police sergeant, appealed a Hearing Officer's decision finding him guilty of deceit under the Police Services Act Code of Conduct and demoting him to third-class constable.
The deceit charge arose from the appellant recording on three Provincial Offence Notices that he had used a LIDAR device to measure speed, when he had actually used RADAR or paced the vehicles.
The Commission upheld the conviction, finding the Hearing Officer's conclusion that the appellant intended to deceive was reasonable and supported by the evidence.
However, the Commission varied the penalty, finding the Hearing Officer erred in principle by treating the appellant's fabricated testimony as an aggravating factor and by penalizing him for an uncharged intent to mislead the courts.
The penalty was varied to a demotion to second-class constable for six months, and to first-class constable thereafter.
Police officer's insubordination conviction upheld for refusing to answer questions about off-duty conduct.
The appellant police officer was involved in an off-duty domestic altercation and subsequently ordered by a superior to answer questions during a Professional Standards Bureau investigation.
The appellant refused to answer, arguing there was no legal authority to compel statements regarding off-duty conduct, and was found guilty of insubordination.
On appeal, the Ontario Civilian Police Commission confirmed the finding of guilt, holding that the order was lawful and that police officers can be compelled to answer questions regarding off-duty conduct that may amount to misconduct.
Commission has jurisdiction over disguised police discipline and directed a hearing regarding the officer's involuntary transfers.
The appellant, a police officer, was transferred and had 200 hours removed from his vacation bank after an investigation into unapproved overtime.
The respondent conceded the transfers were disciplinary but had not held a hearing under the Police Services Act.
The appellant appealed to the Ontario Civilian Police Commission.
The Commission found it had jurisdiction over disguised discipline despite the lack of a first instance hearing.
It directed the Commissioner of the OPP to hold a hearing regarding the transfers, but held that the vacation bank dispute was a payroll matter to be resolved through the collective agreement grievance process.
Production of documents held by the Office of the Fire Marshall ordered on consent subject to confidentiality.
The union renewed its request for the production of documents held by the Office of the Fire Marshall, which had previously been denied due to an ongoing OPP investigation.
On consent of the parties, including the OPP, the Grievance Settlement Board ordered the documents produced forthwith, subject to strict confidentiality conditions limiting access to counsel and one instructing client, and requiring any such documents marked as exhibits to be sealed.
Human rights application dismissed after applicant failed to adduce evidence or comply with disclosure rules.
The applicant alleged discrimination with respect to services because of disability and reprisal.
At the hearing, the self-represented applicant elected not to testify and failed to comply with pre-hearing disclosure obligations.
Given the lack of evidence and non-compliance with the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure, the application was dismissed.
A subsequent request by the applicant to withdraw the application was denied given the time and resources already expended.
Production of documents denied temporarily to protect the integrity of an ongoing police investigation.
The union sought production of documents in the employer's possession.
The employer acknowledged relevance but notified the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) because the documents formed part of an ongoing criminal investigation.
The OPP opposed production, arguing it could compromise the investigation into potential arson and criminal negligence causing death.
Applying the Wagg test, the Grievance Settlement Board declined to order production at this time to protect the integrity of the ongoing investigation, but allowed the union to renew its request in six months or if circumstances materially change.
