Court of Appeal for Ontario

CITATION: Fernandez (Re), 2013 ONCA 595

DATE: 20130930

DOCKET: C56634

BEFORE: Doherty, Rouleau and Pepall JJ.A.

IN THE MATTER OF WILLIAM FERNANDEZ

AN APPEAL UNDER PART XX.1 OF THE CODE

COUNSEL:

Paul Burstein, appearing for the appellant as amicus curiae

A. Menchynski, appearing for the Crown

B. Walker-Renshaw, appearing for the Person in Charge, Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences

HEARD: September 27, 2013

On appeal from the disposition of the Ontario Review Board dated, January 3, 2013.

APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT

[1] This is a close case. The reasons of both the majority and the dissent are clear and cogent.

[2] We do not agree with Mr. Burstein’s able submission that the majority misapprehended Dr. Hill’s evidence. His evidence, considered in its totality, was properly reflected in the majority’s reasons.

[3] As there is no misapprehension of the evidence, the appeal turns on the reasonableness of the decision.

[4] Bearing in mind the deference owed to the Board’s analysis of the evidence (see pp. 7-8 of the reasons), we see no basis upon which to interfere with the majority’s decision.

[5] The appeal is dismissed.