Law Times

Page 4 November 19, 2018 • Law Times www.lawtimesnews.com NEWS Centre for Israel and Jewish af- fairs, Jewish organizations that intervened in the case. "According to his beliefs, the removal of life support is tanta- mount to murder," says Wagner. Ouanounou experienced irreversible cardiac and respira- tory failure on March 8, 2018, Hainey's decision says. The family found a Jewish doctor who was willing to issue a death certificate, and Ouanounou was then buried, the decision says. Hainey then asked the par- ties to submit applications about whether or not the question about which death certificate was valid is moot, he wrote in the decision. The parties held "the application is not moot because there is still a live issue between the parties," Hainey's decision says. But he disagreed. "These issues are now aca- demic," Hainey wrote. "Shalom's death is undisputed and there is no need for the Consent and Capacity Board to consider his treatment." John Campion, a partner at Gardiner Roberts LLP in To- ronto, who represented inter- vener Euthanasia Prevention Coalition on a pro bono basis, says constitutional cases like this could potentially "change the goalposts as to when the proper definition of death is extended." Maintaining life support is "a costly effort," he says, "but the cost in the circumstance is justified." Hainey's decision says he de- clined to comment on the issue because, in his view, the court decided the issue of medical def- initions of death when Justice Lucille Shaw issued her decision in the McKitty v. Hayani case in June. In it, Shaw was being asked to determine if Taquisha McKitty, a Christian, was indeed dead after doctors declared her brain dead. She has been on life support in Brampton, Ont. since September 2017. Shaw ordered McKitty be taken off life support. However, that decision is being appealed, and McKitty remains on life support. Scher is representing the Mc- Kitty family, and he says the ap- peal will be heard in December. Daphne Jarvis, a partner at Borden Ladner Gervais LLP in Toronto, who represented Humber River Hospital, says the hospital is "pleased that Jus- tice Hainey has relied on and affirmed the clarity and the breadth and depth of Justice Shaw's reasons for decision in the McKitty case. Both have confirmed the long-standing recognition in law that death is a fact based on medically objective criteria and not on the subjective beliefs of patients and families." Erica J. Baron, a partner at McCarthy Tétrault LLP in Toronto, who represented the doctors in this case, declined to comment because she is also representing doctors in the Mc- Kitty case. LT to continue until all issues in the case could be heard. In February 2018, arguments were presented about whether or not the death certificate should be rescinded and if the Consent and Capacity Board should have jurisdiction to adjudicate and determine dis- putes where applicants challenge the definition of brain death. "Shalom was an Orthodox Jew, and in his belief, life only ends when his heart stopped beating," says Charles Wagner, a partner at Wagner Sidlofsky LLP in Toronto. Wagner repre- sented B'nai Brith of Canada League for Human Rights, Vaad Harabonim of Toronto and the General Caroline Mulroney said in an email that the minis- try would continue its existing commitment to Pro Bono On- tario — some rent-free spaces at courthouses, which the ministry estimates are worth $580,000. Ian McLeod, a spokesman for the Department of Justice Can- ada, says provinces are respon- sible for managing their legal aid programs but that Pro Bono Ontario was "encouraged" to ap- ply to the Justice Partnership and Innovation funding program. Harrison, who is also trea- surer of the Toronto Lawyers Association, says a group of or- ganizations is planning to help Pro Bono Ontario with its dis- cussions with the law society. More than 1,110 people had signed an online petition call- ing on the province to ensure a "long-term, stable source of funding" that specifically sup- ports the help centres as of Nov. 15. And the Ontario Bar Association confirmed to Law Times that it was planning a meeting to discuss pro bono ser- vices with several local groups. One solution f loated by some of Pro Bono Ontario's supporters is a levy on LSO members, simi- lar to those in other provinces, says Scott Maidment, a partner in the litigation group in the To- ronto office of McMillan LLP. "Lawyers have a special re- sponsibility. And a levy is quite sensible, proper and fitting," says Maidment, who is also vice pres- ident of The Advocates' Society. Jeremy Martin, an associate at Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP in Toronto, says there has been pushback against the idea of a levy. "There are members of our bar that already do extensive pro bono work," Martin says. "It would be inequitable to ask even more from those lawyers . . ." As of Nov. 15, Pro Bono Ontario had raised more than $150,000 in donations, says Lynn Burns, executive director of Pro Bono Ontario. That in- cludes $50,000 each donated by McMillan LLP and Borden Lad- ner Gervais LLP, $10,000 donat- ed by Clyde & Co Canada LLP, $5,000 from Lax O'Sullivan Li- sus Gottlieb LLP and more than $30,000 through a Canadahelps. org page set up by the organiza- tion. Lawyer Quinn Ross also said that more than $11,000 had been raised through a GoFund- Me page. But that's still far short of the $500,000 needed for 2019 for the three centres. LT — with files from Gabrielle Giroday Special responsibility Continued from page 1 Continued from page 1 Removal from life support 'tantamount to murder' © 2018 Thomson Reuters Canada Limited 00252SR-93320-NK Access the most up-to-date information on the latest developments in family law legislation. New and updated in this edition • Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017 (Bill 89, 2016), in force on April 30, 2018. The new legislation brings on signifi cant changes to child protection laws and to terminology. • New regulations accompanying the new Act • Changes to the Family Law Rules – new and amended rules pertaining to applications, motions, and service of documents, including: – Electronic Filing, New Rule – R. 1.1(1) allows permission to fi le and issue documents electronically. Includes an application for divorce R. 36(6.1). – Openness order – New Rule – R. 8(8.1)(a), (b), and (c) allows for special service on the child if he or she is 12 years of age or older, the child's lawyer if any, and the Children's Lawyer. – Costs – New Rule – R. 24(12.1) requires any claim respecting "fees or expenses" to be supported by documentation satisfactory to the court. Shipping and handling are extra. Price(s) subject to change without notice and subject to applicable taxes. New Edition Consolidated Ontario Family Law Statutes and Regulations 2018-2019 Consulting Editor: Brahm D. Siegel Available risk-free for 30 days Online: store.thomsonreuters.ca Call Toll-Free: 1-800-387-5164 In Toronto: 416-609-3800 Print + ProView Order # L7798-8474BE-65203 $156 Softcover + ProView eBook approx. 1720 pages July 2018 Annual volumes supplied on standing order subscription Multiple copy discounts available ProView only Order # A04102-18ON-65203 $130 Print only Order # L7798-8474-65203 $130 The ProView eBook is accessible through your web browser, or can be downloaded to your computer, tablet, or smartphone. Learn more at store.thomsonreuters.ca/proview. Now also available as an eBook on Thomson Reuters ProView® JUDICIAL VACANCY ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE PERTH The Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee advises the Attorney General of Ontario on the appointment of Judges to the Ontario Court of Justice, and invites applications for a judicial position in Perth. This appointment involves presiding over criminal law matters and also involves travel within the regional boundaries as assigned by the Regional Senior Justice and/or the Chief Justice. The minimum requirement to apply to be a Judge in the Ontario Court of Justice is ten years completed membership as a barrister and solicitor at the Bar of one of the Provinces or Territories of Canada. All candidates must apply either by submitting 14 copies of the current (July 2017) completed Judicial Candidate Information Form in the first instance or by a short letter (14 copies) if the form has been submitted within the previous 12 months. Should you wish to change any information in your application, you must send in 14 copies of a fully revised Judicial Candidate Information Form. If you wish to apply and need a current Judicial Candidate Information Form, or if you would like further information, please contact: Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee Tel: (416) 326-4060 Fax: (416) 212-7316 Website: www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj/jaac/ All applications, either sent by courier, mail or hand delivery, must be sent to: Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee c/o Ministry of Government and Consumer Services Mail Delivery 77 Wellesley Street West, Room M2B-88 Macdonald Block, Queen's Park Toronto, Ontario, M7A 1N3 Applications must be on the current prescribed form and must be TYPEWRITTEN or COMPUTER GENERATED and RECEIVED BY 4:30 p.m. on Friday, December 7, 2018. CANDIDATES ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 14 COPIES OF THEIR APPLICATION FORM OR LETTER. A Fax copy will be accepted only if 14 copies of the application or letter are sent concurrently by overnight courier. Applications received after this date WILL NOT be considered. The Judiciary of the Ontario Court of Justice should reflect the diversity of the population it serves. Applications from members of equality-seeking groups are encouraged. Untitled-2 1 2018-11-14 10:32 AM

• Cover