COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
Weiler, Rouleau and Roberts JJ.A.
BETWEEN
Sanjeev Rishi and Shalini Bhardwaj
Plaintiffs/ Respondents
and
Ruby Kakoutis, Sylvia Karoumbalis, Louis Kakoutis, John Young, Doreen K. Young, and Century 21 Harvest Realty Ltd.
Defendants/ Appellant
and Sundeep Bahl and Royal LePage Signature Realty Ltd.
Third Parties
Louis Kakoutis, in person
Wayne Laski, for the respondents
Eric Sherkin, for the defendants, John Young, Doreen K. Young, and Century 21 Harvest Realty Ltd., and the Third Parties
Heard and released orally: November 9, 2016
On appeal from the judgment of Justice D. Stinson of the Superior Court of Justice, dated May 30, 2016, with reasons reported at 2016 ONSC 3496.
ENDORSEMENT
1The appellant appeals the order requiring him to attend a mental examination under s. 105(2) of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43.
2The appellant submits that a psychiatric report would add nothing because he understands the proceedings and a psychiatric opinion would be of no assistance to the court. The appellant further submits that many experts are biased and again, in that situation, their reports are of no assistance. The appellant has cited the conclusions in prior jurisprudence in support of his position. Accordingly, he asks that the order of the motion judge be set aside because, in his opinion, there is no reason that he be assessed.
3The motion judge’s decision to order a mental examination was an exercise of his discretion which, absent error in principle or overriding and palpable error, is entitled to deference from this court. We see no basis to interfere.
4The motion judge noted that the progress of the real estate litigation was impeded by the issue of whether the appellant is still under a legal disability such that he requires a litigation guardian in these proceedings. He then carefully reviewed the relevant legal principles and the evidence before him. He noted the presumption of the appellant’s competence and determined that he did not have current medical information that would support an order that a litigation guardian be appointed. However, he determined that a mental examination was warranted, given previous orders of the court and expert reports concerning the appellant’s conduct. He determined that these provided grounds to believe that there may be substance to the allegation of the appellant’s disability.
5For these reasons, the appeal is dismissed.
6Costs to the respondents in the amount of $3,000, all inclusive.
“K.M. Weiler J.A.”
“Paul Rouleau J.A.”
“L.B. Roberts J.A.”