Court File and Parties
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO DATE: 20210326 DOCKET: M52311 (C69089)
Lauwers J.A. (Motion Judge)
BETWEEN
Tarik Bouragba et. al. Plaintiffs (Appellants/Moving Parties)
and
Conseil Scolaire de District Catholique de l’Est de l’Ontario et. al. Defendants (Respondents/Responding Parties)
Counsel: Ahmed Bouragba, acting in person Charlotte-Anne Malischewski, for the responding parties Paul Marshall Robert, Richard Lewko and Ontario College of Teachers Jeffrey Claydon, for the responding parties Ministry of Education and Denis Chartrand Andrea Baldy, for the responding parties Ottawa-Carleton District School Board and Kevin Gilmore Joel Rocque, for the responding parties Conseil Scolaire de District Catholique de l’Est de l’Ontario, Conseil des Écoles Publiques de L’Est de L’Ontario, Ottawa Catholic School Board, Stephane Vachon, Diane Lamoureux, Norma McDonald, Lyne Racine, Annie Sicard
Heard: March 26, 2021 by video conference
Reasons for Decision
[1] The moving parties seek three elements of relief:
- An order that the Superior Court of Justice in Ottawa permit the transcriptionist to release to the moving parties transcripts that have already been prepared relating to two hearings, the first before Master Fortier on September 24, 2019 and the second before Justice Marc Smith dated November 23, 2020;
- An order extending the time within which the moving parties must perfect this appeal until 14 days after the transcripts have been received, and the order of Justice Smith is settled; and
- Costs of this motion.
[2] The responding parties do not oppose the motion except for the request for costs.
[3] There is no evidence in the record before me that explains why the Superior Court has not released the transcripts. There is a process by which a judicial officer is permitted to review the transcript for accuracy and the transcriptionist is then required to endorse the accuracy of the transcript, in one form or another, depending on the alterations made by the judicial officer, if any. Since the process is well known, I see no reason not to direct the Superior Court to complete its review of the transcripts and authorize their release to the moving parties upon payment for the transcripts expeditiously. I also direct the local Superior Court office to provide a compact disc with the audio recording of the relevant proceedings to the moving parties when they pay for and receive the transcripts. The local Superior Court office will at the same time provide a copy of the compact disc to the other parties and to the Registrar of the Court of Appeal for Ontario. I took this approach in Collins v. Ontario (unreported) which was noted in Collins v. Ontario, 2017 ONCA 317, at para. 12.
[4] I extend the time for the moving parties to perfect the appeal until 14 days after the later of the moving parties’ receipt of the transcripts and the settled order of Justice Smith.
[5] As for costs, although the responding parties were late in advising the moving parties that the relief requested would not be opposed, I see no reason in this instance to award costs to the moving parties. Their essential problem in this motion is with the Superior Court, respecting which the positions of the responding parties play no role.
[6] Finally, the moving parties seek relief relating to the settling of the order of Justice Smith. I have no jurisdiction over the settling of that order, which is due to be settled shortly in the ordinary process.
[7] Nothing in these reasons is to be taken as agreeing that this court has jurisdiction over the appeal under the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43.
[8] So ordered.
“P. Lauwers J.A.”