02/08/2016 – Jurisdiction Ontario
Part 61 published on 01/03/2017
Court orders assessment of owner’s mental condition and ability to understand information relevant to making decisions in Court processes
There were disputes between the owner and the condominium corporation, in Superior Court and in Small Claims Court, stemming primarily from enforcement steps taken by the condominium corporation and a resulting lien registered by the corporation against the owner’s unit. In the Superior Court process, the corporation sought and obtained an order for assessment of the owner’s mental condition and ability to understand information relevant to making decisions in the Court processes. The owner sought leave to appeal, which was denied. The Court said:
In deciding the issue, the motions judge reviewed the provisions of s. 105 of the Courts of Justice Act and the provisions of Rule 7 and of the Substitute Decisions Act. In coming to his decision, the motions judge considered the material before him and the concerns raised by the Respondent about Ms. Sennek’s behaviours. When looked at separately, he concluded that each of these behaviours might not be considered odd, but when looked at in totality, he found that Ms. Sennek’s behaviours appeared to be bizarre. He specifically cited her behaviour with respect to her identity and that this was an issue in the Small Claims Court action. He noted her complaints made to the Privacy Commission and to the Law Society of Upper Canada (LSUC) against the Respondent’s counsel and the derogatory terms that she used in reference to others in her pleadings. He noted that the Respondent had already incurred legal fees of over $18,000 because of an original lien claim in the amount of $763.14.
…
It is apparent that the motions judge conducted a contextual analysis in order to determine whether the order should be made and attempted to balance the affected party’s fundamental rights against the court’s duty to protect the interests of the other parties and the Court, as well as the societal interest of a fair, efficient and effective dispute resolution process.