The moving party sought leave to appeal an interlocutory order compelling her to undergo a further psychiatric assessment under s. 79(1) of the Substitute Decisions Act.
She had previously been found incapable and was under guardianship, but brought an application to terminate the guardianship supported by new assessments indicating she was now capable.
The responding party successfully moved for a further assessment, which the motion judge granted without reasons.
The Divisional Court granted leave to appeal, finding good reason to doubt the correctness of the order as it may not have appropriately balanced the individual's autonomy against the state's duty to protect the vulnerable, and noting the issue was of sufficient importance to warrant appellate review.
