COURT FILE NO.: CV-20-4187-0000

DATE: 2020 11 12

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO

RE: Waleed Sewilam

AND:

Ahmed Elbasiouni & The Public Guardian and Trustee

BEFORE: Ricchetti, RSJ

HEARD: November 12, 2020

COUNSEL: M. Elbassiouni (counsel for the Applicant)

PRESENT: Dr. Mohammed El Saidi (witness) W. Sewilam (applicant)

HEARD: by videoconference on November 12, 2020

Endorsement on Substitute Decisions Act Application

THE BACKGROUND

[1] At the conclusion of the hearing, I advised Mr. Elbassiouni that the motion was granted, and an order was to issue in accordance with the revised draft order (with a slight amendment). I further advised that written reasons would follow. These are those reasons.

[2] This is the first time an application was heard regarding the appointment as guardians and decision makers under the Substitute Decisions Act for Ahmed Elbasiouni. A version of this application was originally scheduled for September 10, 2020 but was withdrawn after this court released its decision on a Litigation Guardian motion for Ahmed Elbasiouni on September 2, 2020 (heard July 27, 2020).

[3] As of the date the Litigation Guardian motion was heard, there was little medical evidence regarding Ahmed Elbasiouni’s mental health condition, and what evidence there was, was equivocal regarding Ahmed Elbasiouni’s mental health “disability”. Accordingly, the motion to appoint a litigation guardian was dismissed.

[4] The evidence before the court today on this application is more cogent, reliable and extremely compelling that an order under the Substitute Decisions Act be made:

a) Dr. El Saidi is a practising psychiatrist for approximately 30 days. There is no question he is qualified to give an opinion on Ahmed’s mental health and ability to care for himself and his property;

b) Dr. El Saidi has been involved in Ahmed Elbasiouni’s mental health care for a number of months;

c) If necessary, I would have found Dr. El Saidi to be a qualified expert to give such medical opinions to the court. I say “if necessary” since Dr. El Saidi is the primary attending psychiatrist to Ahmed Elbasiouni and therefore is qualified to provide direct evidence on his observations, diagnosis, and prognosis for Ahmed Elbasiouni; and

d) Dr. El Saidi prepared an email report dated September 14, 2020, which he adopted as true, when giving viva voce evidence today to this court. On the basis of that report, there was compelling evidence regarding Ahmed Elbasiouni’s mental health issues.

[5] However, there is much more that occurred subsequent to September 14, 2020 that adds to the reasons why an order under the Substitute Decisions Act is necessary.

[6] Let me briefly summarizes some of the events:

a) On October 4, 2020 the police were called given Ahmed Elbasiouni’s suicidal statements and thoughts. He was admitted to the hospital on a Form 1;

b) A few days later, Ahmed Elbasiouni was discharged from the hospital, but he continued to see Dr. El Saidi for his mental health issues;

c) Again, on October 14, 2020 Ahmed Elbasiouni became suicidal. The police were called and Ahmed Elbasiouni was admitted to the hospital under a Form 3 and placed in a specialized mental heath care unit;

d) While in the hospital, the doctors determined Ahmed Elbasiouni could not consent to medical treatment (Form 33) and that he could not administer his property (Form 21). The doctors made arrangements for his mental health care, including giving Ahmed Elbasiouni long-acting psychiatric medication; and

e) Ahmed Elbasiouni remains in the hospital for these mental health issues.

[7] In these circumstances, I am satisfied that it is necessary and appropriate for an order to be made under the Substitute Decisions Act appointing Mr. Sewilam as his guardian. Mr. Sewilam is Ahmed Elbasiouni’s cousin. He has already intervened to assist the doctors to treat Ahmed Elbasiouni while in the hospital. There is nothing in the record which suggests that he would not be an appropriate guardian and decision maker for Ahmed Elbasiouni.

[8] I note that the Public Guardian and Trustee (PGT) were served with the materials for this motion. The PGT does not oppose.

[9] No costs of this application.

[10] Order to issue in the form signed by me.

Ricchetti, RSJ

Date: November 12, 2020

Released: November 13, 2020