|
Fairness - Charter. H.C. v. Children’s Aid Society of Toronto
In H.C. v. Children’s Aid Society of Toronto (Ont Div Ct, 2025) the Ontario Divisional Court dismissed a JR, here against a CFSRB order limited to ordering the local CAS "to provide a letter explaining the investigation and why it was unable to disclose more information gathered in the investigation".
Here the court usefully considers the interaction between procedural fairness and Charter rights:[39] Finally, many of H.C.’s s. 7 arguments are fundamentally the same as his submissions regarding procedural fairness and there is no injustice in addressing them in that context. Procedural fairness, which is dependent on context, is the constitutional norm: R. v. Rodgers, 2006 SCC 15 (CanLII), [2006] 1 S.C.R. 554, at paras. 47-49; Suresh v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2002 SCC 1, [2002] 1 S.C.R. 3, at paras. 113, 121. I am mindful that administrative decision-makers must make their decisions in a Charter compliant fashion, but given the arguments raised on this judicial review, it would be needlessly duplicative to conduct a separate constitutional analysis.
[40] Therefore, H.C.’s s. 7 Charter grounds of review can be dispensed with without any further specific reference to them in these reasons.
[41] As well, CAST’s argument that the judicial review of the verification decision should be dismissed as being out of time can be dealt with in short order. I note that H.C. brought a timely application for the judicial review of the CFSRB’s decision. Had he brought a judicial review application of the CAST’s verification decision before resorting to the CFSRB process, no doubt he would have been met with a prematurity objection. I would exercise my discretion to hear the judicial review application of the CAST verification decision.
|
