[CITATION](http://intra.judicialsecurity.jus.gov.on.ca/NeutralCitation/): Hicks v. Ontario Ombudsman, 2020 ONSC 7790
COURT FILE NO.: 344/20
DATE: 20201214
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO – DIVISIONAL COURT
RE: Hicks v. Ontario Ombudsman
COUNSEL: Mr Hicks, self-represented No one appearing for the respondent Ombudsman[^1] D. Mack, assisting for the Crown S. Cohen, observing and assisting for Mr Hicks
BEFORE: D.L. Corbett J.
DATE: December 14, 2020
ENDORSEMENT
D.L. Corbett J.
[1] On December 7, 2020, I remanded Mr Hicks in custody to December 14, 2020, in respect to the issues of civil contempt of court described in my prior endorsements (2020 ONSC 5989 and 2020 ONSC 6258) and subsequent events related to those issues.
[2] As I indicated to Mr Hicks, the court wishes some assurance that he will not repeat the conduct that gave rise to the findings of contempt. After a constructive conversation with Mr Hicks about these matters on December 14, 2020, the court disposes of all matters related to these civil contempt of court issues as follows:
(a) Mr Hicks apologized for his heated words to the court in the teleconference of December 7, 2020. The court accepted that apology; there shall be no finding of contempt for that outburst and no further steps in respect to it.
(b) Mr Hicks failed to appear as ordered on October 23, 2020. I am satisfied that Mr Hicks’ experiences being subject to a bench warrant and then being remanded in custody as a consequence of his failure to appear on October 23rd are sufficient to address this issue. There shall be no finding of contempt for the failure to appear and no further steps in respect to it.
(c) Mr Hicks has been in custody since his arrest on December 7th, up until today, December 14th, a total of 8 days. Mr Hicks advises that typical credit for this detention at the detention facility is often accounted on a 2:1 basis. I accept that statement for today’s purposes, though I have not sought confirmation of this information: I am satisfied that the time spent in detention on remand is sufficient for the purposes of sentencing for the initial contempt of court finding (2020 ONSC 6258).
(d) Mr Hicks is sentenced to time served for the finding of contempt on October 9, 2020, as reflected in this court’s endorsement of 2020 ONSC 6258.
[3] This brings these contempt proceedings to a conclusion.
[4] As discussed with Mr Hicks during the sentencing hearing, Mr Hicks is required to comply with the order of Corthorne J., and the subsequent order of this court (2020 ONSC 6258). Mr Hicks may not commence any proceedings in Ontario without prior permission from the case management judge. I am currently the case management judge, but it is likely that another judge will be appointed soon by Regional Senior Justice MacLeod in this role.
[5] The court notes that Crown counsel appeared today as a courtesy, at the court’s request, to assist the court with the status of Mr Hicks’ other proceedings before the Ontario Court of Justice. Defence counsel did not appear on the record for Mr Hicks in the proceedings before this court, but did appear to observe and did provide the court with useful information concerning matters ongoing in the Ontario Court of Justice.
D.L. Corbett J.
Date: December 14, 2020
[^1]: The court directed in its prior endorsement that counsel for the Ombudsman had standing to appear at this show cause hearing but was not required to do so. Counsel advised in advance that the Ombudsman would not appear.