COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
Rosenberg, Armstrong and Juriansz JJ.A.
BETWEEN
IN THE MATTER OF Ryan E. McDougall
An appeal under PART XX.1 of the Code
Ryan Edward McDougall, in person
Anita Szigeti, amicus curiae
John Patton, for the respondent the Attorney General of Ontario
Julie Zamprogna, for the respondent the Regional Mental health Care
Heard and endorsed: March 22, 2012
On appeal from the Disposition Order of the Ontario Review Board dated September 12, 2011.
APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT
1It is gratifying to see how well Mr. McDougall is doing since the July 2011 hearing. However, the issue before this court is whether the Board’s disposition is unreasonable. In our view, the disposition is not unreasonable. Before the Board, all parties agreed that a detention order was the least restrictive disposition given the history since December 2010. The record bears out that this was a proper position to take. There was evidence to support this disposition.
2As to the question of the 50 km radius, again we are of the view that the decision was reasonable. At the time there were reasons to keep the appellant near the hospital. The fresh evidence from the hospital and the appellant’s submissions today show that the appellant is doing very well in London. No doubt, his progress will be taken into account at the next Board hearing, but the September 12, 2011 decision of the Board was not unreasonable and we defer to that decision.
3Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.