COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
CITATION: Hsieh v. Ontario (Community and Social Services), 2017 ONCA 890
DATE: 20171121
DOCKET: M48150 & M48072
Rouleau, Trotter and Paccioco JJ.A.
BETWEEN
Mei Chu Hsieh
Applicant (Moving Party)
and
Ministry of Community and Social Services
Respondent (Responding Party)
Mei Chu Hsieh, acting in person
Mimi Singh, for the respondent
Heard and released orally: November 14, 2017
REASONS FOR DECISION
[1] The moving party seeks to review the decision of Justice Miller denying her an extension of time to file a notice of motion seeking leave to appeal the Divisional Court’s dismissal of the moving party’s application for judicial review of a decision of a social benefits tribunal.
[2] In our view, the motion must be dismissed. Justice Miller found that the proposed appeal does not meet the test for leave as set out in the decision of Sault Dock Co. v. Sault St. Marie (City), 1972 CanLII 572 (ON CA), [1973] 2 O.R. 479 (C.A.). The proposed appeal does not involve a question of law or matters of public importance. The questions it would raise are solely of interest to the parties and not to the public. We agree that the proposed appeal is lacking in merit. The interest of justice would not therefore be served by granting an extension to the moving party to proceed with seeking leave to appeal.
[3] For these reasons, the motion is dismissed. There will no order as to costs.
“Paul Rouleau J.A.”
“G.T. Trotter J.A.”
“David Paciocco J.A.”