Court File and Parties
CITATION: Toronto Star v AG Ontario, 2017 ONSC 3212
COURT FILE NO.: CV-17-569061
DATE: 20170524
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
RE: Toronto Star Newspapers Ltd., Applicant
AND:
The Attorney General of Ontario, Respondent
BEFORE: EM Morgan J.
COUNSEL: Paul Schabas and Iris Fischer, for the Applicant
Daniel Guttman and Manizeh Fancy, for the Respondent
HEARD: May 24, 2017
ENDORSEMENT
[1] Counsel met with me today for a preliminary case management conference.
[2] The following timetable has been agreed upon by both parties:
Respondent (“MAG”) Responding Motion Record – September 29, 2017
Applicant (“Star”) Reply Motion Record – November 16, 2017
Cross-examinations on affidavits – by December 15, 2017
Star Factum – January 15, 2018
MAG Factum – February 19, 2018
Hearing – March 8-9, 2018
[3] Paragraph 1(a) of the Notice of Application seeks an order in respect of “quasi-judicial tribunals, including those listed in Schedule ‘A’ to this Notice of Application, through their inclusion in the Schedule of Regulation 460, R.R.O. 990 to FIPPA…” [emphasis added]. There are 16 specific tribunals listed in Schedule ‘A’, but the language of para 1(a) suggests that any similarly situated tribunal included in the relevant regulation could be subject to this constitutional challenge. Counsel for MAG advises that there are potentially several hundred such tribunals, which would make this litigation unwieldy.
[4] Counsel for the Star and counsel for MAG have therefore agreed that the subject matter of the Application will be limited to the 16 tribunals named in Schedule ‘A’ to the Notice of Application. Whether an eventual ruling in this Application is applicable to any other tribunal in Ontario will be left to be determined at another time, if and when the specific question arises.
Morgan J.
Date: May 24, 2017