CITATION: Bulakhtina v. Death Investigation Oversight Council, 2022 ONSC 5880
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 608/21
DATE: 20221013
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT
BETWEEN:
DR. ELENA BULAKHTINA
Amani Oakley, for the Applicant
Applicant
– and –
DEATH INVESTIGATION OVERSIGHT
Alexandra Clark and Stephanie Figliomeni,
COUNCIL and DR. MICHAEL POLLANEN
for the Respondent, Death Investigation
Oversight Council
Respondents
– and –
Jonathan Shime, for the Respondent
Dr. Michael Pollanen
HEARD at Toronto: October 13, 2022
nishikawa J. (Orally)
[1] The Applicant brings the motion to adjourn the hearing currently scheduled for October 24, 2022, to a date in the new year. The basis for the adjournment request is that the Applicant is working as a medic in Ukraine, and that it will be difficult for her to participate in the hearing because her internet access is unstable and because she will have to move locations to avoid detection.
[2] Counsel for the Applicant submits that it will be difficult to obtain instructions before, and during, the course of the hearing. The Applicant further submits that this application should be heard on the same date, by the same Panel, or after a similar application brought by Dr. Turner against the same Respondent in Court File 175/20.
[3] The Respondent, Dr. Pollanen opposes the motion. The Respondent, the Complaints Committee of the Death Investigation Oversight Council, takes no position on the motion.
[4] The Application was commenced in 2021. A previously scheduled motion hearing for April 2022 was adjourned at the request of Applicant’s counsel.
[5] Court time is an especially scarce resource during the pandemic. Dates that have long been scheduled are difficult to fill on short notice. While the Applicant first communicated the request for an adjournment in July 2022, and requested a case conference, no motion was brought until September.
[6] The issue of whether the application should be heard with, or as soon after the Turner application, had not previously been raised. While the Applicant now raises the possibility of inconsistent findings, if this was the case, it would have been apparent at the outset; moreover, it is not necessarily possible that both applications be heard by the same panel. The fact that the Turner application was filed before this proceeding, is of no import.
[7] The Applicant also missed previous deadlines set by the Case Management Judge. The Applicant also raised a new issue at that stage.
[8] No evidence will be called at the hearing, and the issues will, to a large extent, be covered in written facta. However, the dates for the filing of facta have all passed.
[9] Despite my concerns with the late request for an adjournment under the circumstances, and provided that the hearing date is peremptory on the Applicant, I am prepared to exercise my discretion to grant the request. In my view, it is in the interest of justice to allow the Applicant sufficient time to instruct counsel. I would anticipate that the matter will proceed more efficiently if Applicant’s Counsel has sufficient time to consult with their client in advance of the hearing date.
[10] Any prejudice to the Respondent, Dr. Pollanen, will be minimized by granting as brief an adjournment as possible in the circumstances.
[11] A timetable for the exchange of facta is also to be set.
[12] Accordingly, the motion for the adjournment of the October 24, 2022 hearing date is granted.
“NISHIKAWA J.”
Date of Oral Reasons for Judgment: October 13, 2022
Date of Written Release: October 18, 2022
CITATION: Bulakhtina v. Death Investigation Oversight Council, 2022 ONSC 5880
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 608/21
DATE: 20221013
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
BETWEEN:
DR. ELENA BULAKHTINA
Applicant
– and –
DEATH INVESTIGATION OVERSIGHT COUNCIL
and DR. MICHAEL POLLANEN
Respondents
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
NISHIKAWA J.
Date of Oral Reasons for Judgment: October 13, 2022
Date of Release: October 18, 2022