|
Intervention - Charter-HR Issues. Ministry of Community and Social Services v. Robinson-Cooke
In Ministry of Community and Social Services v. Robinson-Cooke (Div Court, 2024) the Divisional Court considers an amicus intervention motion by ISAC (Income Security Advocacy Clinic), here on a human rights JR issue:[7] Rule 13.02 of the Rules of Civil Procedure R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, provides that any person may apply to intervene in a proceeding as a friend of the court for the purpose of rendering assistance to the court by way of argument.
[8] ISAC submits that given the quasi-constitutional status of human rights legislation, the court should apply the criteria outlined in Bedford v. Canada (Attorney General), 2009 ONCA 669, at para. 2 which apply to motions to intervene in constitutional matter. These criteria are:(a) that the proposed intervener has a real, substantial, and identifiable interest in the subject matter of the proceedings;
(b) that it has an important perspective distinct from the immediate parties; or
(c) that it is a well-recognized group with a special expertise and a broadly identifiable membership base [9] I am also guided by three criteria, as set out in Peel (Regional Municipality) v. Great Atlantic and Pacific Co of Canada, (1990) 1990 CanLII 6886 (ON CA), 74 O.R. (2d) 164 (C.A.), at para. 10.:(a) the nature of the case;
(b) the issues that arise in the case; and
(c) the likelihood that the proposed intervener will be able to make a useful contribution to the resolution of the appeal without causing injustice to the immediate parties. [10] I am satisfied that ISAC meets the criteria in Peel and in Bedford and I make the order sought for the following reasons.
[11] ISAC has extensive experience and expertise with respect to social assistance including ODSP benefits, ODSP Policy Directives, and the Human Rights Code. This application involves all of these policies and legislation.
[12] Since 2001, ISAC has successfully litigated numerous cases on behalf of vulnerable and low-income individuals before all levels of Court. This is the population which may be affected by the findings in this application for judicial review. I am satisfied that ISAC has the necessary experience and expertise and has a connection to the issues on behalf of the populations that is serves.
[13] Further, the Court of Appeal has recognized the “unique expertise of ISAC” to assist in a case involving issues of adverse-impact discrimination and substantive equality in the context of low income individuals living with disabilities: Jacob v. Canada (Attorney General), 2024 ONCA 195, at para. 10.
[14] In support of the application to intervene, ISAC taken steps to demonstrate to the parties that its submissions will not duplicate those of the other parties. In March of 2024, ISAC provided all parties with an outline of its proposed submissions and detailed these in its materials in support of this application.
[15] Given that the parties are not opposing the order sought, I will merely note that I have read the motion record and factum and agree on the strength of the material filed, that ISAC will be a helpful addition to the hearing and bring its experience and expertise to the arguments. Its policy and advocacy role beyond the concerns of the immediate parties will make a useful contribution and will not prejudice any of the parties. ISAC does not seek to expand the record. ISAC proposes to work within the court’s timetable and not delay the hearing of the application.
|
