Nicola Simmons

The moving party sought reconsideration of a single judge's order dismissing a motion to stay Divisional Court proceedings.

The stay was sought to prevent the Divisional Court from issuing a publication ban and anonymization order regarding the moving party's child.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the motion for reconsideration as moot, noting that the Divisional Court had already granted the publication ban and anonymization order.

The Court declined to exercise its discretion to hear the moot issue, finding no matter of public importance that extended beyond the interests of the parties.

The College of Early Childhood Educators sought to withdraw accusations of professional misconduct against the respondent member.

The respondent had signed an undertaking to complete remedial coursework and mentorship, which she successfully completed.

The Discipline Committee allowed the withdrawal, finding that the public interest was protected by the respondent's successful completion of the undertaking and her demonstrated commitment to improving her practice.

The self-represented appellant brought a motion requesting that the hearing panel recuse themselves due to a reasonable apprehension of bias.

The appellant alleged bias after the panel chair directed that written submissions might be required on whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to order the requested placement, and because the chair was cross-appointed to another tribunal.

The Tribunal dismissed the motion, finding that an informed person would not conclude that the panel's actions, which included attempting to assist the appellant in focusing on relevant evidence and exercising its authority to determine a jurisdictional issue, demonstrated a reasonable apprehension of bias.

The respondent Durham Student Transportation Services (DSTS) requested to add the Durham District School Board (DDSB) as a respondent to human rights applications alleging discrimination in school bus transportation based on family status.

The Tribunal applied the Smyth test and found that DDSB's policies determined transportation eligibility and DSTS could not act without DDSB's authority.

As DDSB consented and there was no prejudice, the Tribunal granted the request to add DDSB as a respondent.