|
Ontario trying to 'hide' legal negligence Shannon Kari The Ottawa Citizen Monday, May 30, 2005
The province has repeatedly refused to turn over more than 900 pages of court documents generated by The Office of the Children's Lawyer when it represented the woman (who can be identified only as Jane Doe) in a lawsuit against an insurance company. "What are they trying to hide?" asked the victim's aunt, who is legally her niece's substitute decision-maker. "There must be something in those pages they don't want me to get my hands on, which would show they were negligent," she said. The aunt first requested the court file in the fall of 2000 because she was unhappy with the province's work and because it was willing to settle with the insurance company for about $50,000. That money would likely have gone to the Child and Family Services office for York region, to cover expenses when Jane Doe lived in one of its group homes in 1999. The Children's Lawyer no longer represents Jane and the insurance lawsuit is ongoing. Jane is also suing the children's aid agency for $1.2 million, alleging that as a teenager, she was sexually assaulted on three occasions by young men who lived at its group homes. Jane requires significant one-on-one supervision, which her mother cannot provide as a result of injuries she suffered in unrelated automobile accidents. Her aunt said the complete legal file is required to try to resolve the lawsuits and provide proper care for the woman. When Jane's aunt asked for the file, the Children's Lawyer decided it should be a freedom of information request. However, when the Information and Privacy Commissioner ruled in April 2002 that Jane should receive her 3,700-page file, except for 38 pages, the Children's Lawyer appealed the decision. A three-judge panel of the Ontario Divisional Court was scathing in its criticism of the Children's Lawyer in an August 2003 ruling. "It puzzles and very much concerns the court that the request of Jane Doe for her legal file was diverted to the (Freedom of Information) stream at all," said the court. "The CLO is appointed to help its clients and it is unjust to permit it to refuse to even disclose to them what it has done, or refrained, or neglected to do for them," it said. The province filed another appeal, but the Ontario Court of Appeal again ruled in Jane's favour in a decision released six weeks ago. The Children's Lawyer has not yet turned over the court file and it referred calls to a spokesman for the Ministry of the Attorney General. Brendan Crawley said the Children's Lawyer is "considering its position" and has until June 17 to decide whether to file an appeal to the Supreme Court. "What gives them the right to do this, at our expense, when they have lost twice?" asked Jane's aunt, who lives in a small town near Orangeville. She used to be involved in municipal politics, but is now devoting most of her time to her niece's legal and medical issues and joked that her friends call her a "Canadian Erin Brockovich." Ms. Brockovich, portrayed by Julia Roberts in the 2000 film, was instrumental
in building a case against Pacific Gas and Electric Co., alleging contamination
of drinking water in the California town of Hinkley. |