Centre for Addiction and Mental Health v. Young et al., 2011 ONCA 432

JudgeDoherty, Goudge and Armstrong, JJ.A.
CourtCourt of Appeal (Ontario)
Case DateMay 06, 2011
JurisdictionOntario
Citations2011 ONCA 432;(2011), 278 O.A.C. 274 (CA)

CAMH v. Young (2011), 278 O.A.C. 274 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2011] O.A.C. TBEd. JN.009

The Person in Charge of Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (appellant) v. Ian K. Young (respondent) and Her Majesty the Queen (respondent)

(C52218; 2011 ONCA 432)

Indexed As: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health v. Young et al.

Ontario Court of Appeal

Doherty, Goudge and Armstrong, JJ.A.

June 7, 2011.

Summary:

In 2001 Young was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder with respect to serious criminal offences. He was initially held in hospital under a detention order. He had lived in the community since March 2005, at first under the terms of a detention order and, by late 2006, under a conditional discharge disposition made by the Ontario Review Board. In October 2009, he was involuntarily committed under the Mental Health Act. He remained in the hospital under that order until December 2009. Young's annual review hearing pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code proceeded in March 2010. By that time, Young was back living in the community. The Review Board continued the order allowing Young's discharge on conditions, which included that Young, upon notice by the person in charge of the hospital, would immediately submit to attendance and for readmission to hospital; and upon the request of the hospital, attend for psychiatric assessment, and upon notice of the person in charge, attend for admission to the hospital. The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (the hospital) appealed, raising three issues: did the Review Board err when it held that confinement pursuant to the Mental Health Act triggered the requirement that the Review Board conduct a restriction of liberty hearing pursuant to s. 672.81(2.1) of the Code; did the Review Board err in law by imposing a disposition that blended a conditional discharge with a detention order resulting in a disposition that was not available under either s. 672.54(b) or s. 672.54 (c) of the Code; if the Review Board's disposition was a conditional discharge under s. 672.54(b), was that order unreasonable.

The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. The Review Board erred in finding that involuntary committal under the Mental Health Act triggered the obligation to give notice to the Review Board under s. 672.56(2) and the Board's obligation to hold a hearing under s. 672.81(2.1). However, that error had no effect on the ultimate disposition imposed by the Board. The court concluded that the Review Board's disposition was a conditional discharge within the meaning of s. 672.54(b) and the order fashioned by the Review Board was not unreasonable.

Criminal Law - Topic 93.83

General principles - Mental disorder - Dispositions by court or review board - Discharge or detention subject to conditions - In 2001 Young was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder with respect to serious criminal offences - He was initially held in hospital under a detention order - He had lived in the community since March 2005, at first under the terms of a detention order and, by late 2006, under a conditional discharge disposition made by the Ontario Review Board - At an annual review in March 2010, the Ontario Review Board continued an order allowing Young's discharge on conditions, which included that Young, upon notice by the person in charge of the hospital, would immediately submit to attendance and for readmission to hospital; and upon the request of the hospital, attend for psychiatric assessment, and upon notice of the person in charge, attend for admission to the hospital - The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) appealed - CAMH argued that the Review Board imposed a disposition that blended a conditional discharge with a detention order, resulting in a disposition that was not available under either s. 672.54(b) or s. 672.54 (c) of the Criminal Code - The Ontario Court of Appeal held that the Review Board's disposition was a conditional discharge within the meaning of s. 672.54(b) - While a conditional discharge could not contain a term authorizing the hospital to re-confine the individual within the hospital, the Review Board's order did not have that effect - The terms imposed by the Review Board could properly be attached as conditions to a conditional discharge - A breach of those conditions triggered the breach provisions and did not give CAMH the power to detain Young - See paragraphs 25 to 33.

Criminal Law - Topic 93.83

General principles - Mental disorder - Dispositions by court or review board - Discharge or detention subject to conditions - [See Criminal Law - Topic 93.95 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 93.95

General principles - Mental disorder - Dispositions by court or review board - Appeals or judicial review - In 2001 Young was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder with respect to serious criminal offences - He was initially held in hospital under a detention order - He had lived in the community since March 2005, at first under the terms of a detention order and, by late 2006, under a conditional discharge disposition made by the Ontario Review Board - In October 2009, he was involuntarily committed under the Mental Health Act - He remained in the hospital under that order until December 2009 - Young's annual review hearing before the Review Board pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code proceeded in March 2010 - By that time, Young was back living in the community - The Review Board continued the order allowing Young's discharge on conditions, which included that Young, upon notice by the person in charge of the hospital, would immediately submit to attendance and for readmission to hospital; and upon the request of the hospital, attend for psychiatric assessment, and upon notice of the person in charge, attend for admission to the hospital - In addition, he was required to take his medication and submit to testing to monitor his compliance - The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from the Board's disposition - The order fashioned by the Review Board was not unreasonable - See paragraphs 34 to 40.

Criminal Law - Topic 93.96

General principles - Mental disorder - Dispositions by court or review board - Duties of court or review board - The Ontario Court of Appeal held that the Ontario Review Board erred in finding that involuntary committal under the Mental Health Act triggered the obligation to give notice to the Review Board under s. 672.56(2) of the Criminal Code and the Board's obligation to hold a restriction on liberty hearing under s. 672.81(2.1) of the Code - Confinement pursuant to the Mental Health Act was not a restriction on liberty made pursuant to any authority delegated to hospital personnel by the Review Board and was, therefore, not subject to the requirements of s. 672.81(2.1) - See paragraphs 11 to 24.

Cases Noticed:

Brockville Psychiatric Hospital v. McGillis et al. (1996), 93 O.A.C. 226 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 30].

Forensic Psychiatric Institute (B.C.) v. Johnson et al. (1995), 66 B.C.A.C. 34; 108 W.A.C. 34 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 30].

R. v. Owen (T.), [2003] 1 S.C.R. 779; 304 N.R. 254; 173 O.A.C. 285; 2003 SCC 33, refd to. [para. 34].

R. v. Breitwieser (A.J.) (2009), 264 O.A.C. 388; 99 O.R.(3d) 43; 2009 ONCA 784, refd to. [para. 37].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 672.54(b), sect. 672.54(c) [para. 10]; sect. 672.56(2) [para. 15]; sect. 672.81(2.1) [para. 16]; sect. 672.82(1) [para. 22].

Counsel:

Jean D. Buie, for the appellant;

Uma Kancharla, for the respondent, Young;

A. Alyea, for the respondent, Her Majesty the Queen.

This appeal was heard on May 6, 2011, before Doherty, Goudge and Armstrong, JJ.A., of the Ontario Court of Appeal. The following judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered by Doherty, J.A., and was released on June 7, 2011.

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 practice notes
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (September 23-27)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • October 11, 2019
    ...Boucher (Re), 2015 ONCA 135, Tolias (Re), 2018 ONCA 2015, Collins (Re), 2018 ONCA 563, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health v Young, 2011 ONCA 432, Valdez (Re), 2018 ONCA 657 CIVIL DECISIONS Derakhshan v. Narula, 2019 ONCA 742 [Doherty, Harvison Young and Thorburn JJ.A.] Counsel: FD, acti......
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Annotated Ontario Mental Health Statutes - Fifth edition
    • June 28, 2022
    ...(Re), [1942] O.R. 301, [1942] 3 D.L.R. 185, [1942] O.J. No. 441 (C.A.) .................................................. 189 Young, Re, 2011 ONCA 432 ............................................................................................................................. 484 Young v. H......
  • Criminal Code
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Annotated Ontario Mental Health Statutes - Fifth edition
    • June 28, 2022
    ...General) , [2004] 1 SCR 498 at paras. 39–40. 103 Valdez (Re) , 2018 ONCA 657 at para. 22 [ Valdez (Re) ]. The court cites Young, Re , 2011 ONCA 432 at para. 26. 104 Winko , above note 100 at para. 3. 484484 Criminal Code s 672.54 R. v. Lepage , [1999] 2 SCR 744 — Part XX.1 (speciically the ......
  • The 2024 Annotated Mental Health Provisions of the Criminal Code (Part XX.1)
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books The 2024 annotated mental health provisions of the criminal code - Part XX.1
    • February 27, 2024
    ...v. Ontario (Attorney General) , 2004 SCC 20 . 91 Valdez (Re) , 2018 ONCA 657 at para. 22 [ Valdez (Re) ]. The court cites Young, Re , 2011 ONCA 432 at para. 26. 92 Mazzei v. British Columbia (Director of Adult Forensic Psychiatric Services) , 2006 SCC 7 at para. 16 [ Mazzei ]. 93 Pene......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
7 cases
  • Blake (Re), 2021 ONCA 230
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Ontario)
    • April 12, 2021
    ...Breitwieser, 2009 ONCA 784, 99 O.R. (3d) 43, at paras. 7-18; R. v. Lamanna, 2009 ONCA 612, 252 O.A.C. 280, at paras. 14-17; Young (Re), 2011 ONCA 432, 273 C.C.C. (3d) 512, at para. 26; Coburn (Re), 2016 ONCA 536, at para. 19; Munezero (Re), 2017 ONCA 585, at paras. 4-9; Marchese (Re), 2018 ......
  • Davies (Re), 2019 ONCA 738
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Ontario)
    • September 23, 2019
    ...of the quicker return under a detention order were explained by Doherty J.A. in Centre for Addiction and Mental Health v. Young, 2011 ONCA 432, 278 O.A.C. 274, at para. 26. The hospital also emphasized the need for the person in charge of the hospital to have the ability to approve the appe......
  • Esgin (Re), 2019 ONCA 155
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Ontario)
    • February 26, 2019
    ...test, something more is required to justify a detention order than mere convenience to the hospital. [21] As discussed in Young (Re), 2011 ONCA 432, 278 O.A.C. 274, at para. 26, there are multiple ways in which to secure someone's attendance at the hospital when they fail to comply with a c......
  • Ahmadzai (Re), 2020 ONCA 169
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Ontario)
    • March 5, 2020
    ...an individual to hospital will not always justify a detention order as a necessary and appropriate disposition. As discussed in Young Re, 2011 ONCA 432, 278 O.A.C. 274, at para. 26, there are multiple ways in which to secure someone’s attendance at the hospital when they fail to comply with......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (September 23-27)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • October 11, 2019
    ...Boucher (Re), 2015 ONCA 135, Tolias (Re), 2018 ONCA 2015, Collins (Re), 2018 ONCA 563, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health v Young, 2011 ONCA 432, Valdez (Re), 2018 ONCA 657 CIVIL DECISIONS Derakhshan v. Narula, 2019 ONCA 742 [Doherty, Harvison Young and Thorburn JJ.A.] Counsel: FD, acti......
4 books & journal articles
  • Criminal Code
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Annotated Ontario Mental Health Statutes - Fifth edition
    • June 28, 2022
    ...General) , [2004] 1 SCR 498 at paras. 39–40. 103 Valdez (Re) , 2018 ONCA 657 at para. 22 [ Valdez (Re) ]. The court cites Young, Re , 2011 ONCA 432 at para. 26. 104 Winko , above note 100 at para. 3. 484484 Criminal Code s 672.54 R. v. Lepage , [1999] 2 SCR 744 — Part XX.1 (speciically the ......
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Annotated Ontario Mental Health Statutes - Fifth edition
    • June 28, 2022
    ...(Re), [1942] O.R. 301, [1942] 3 D.L.R. 185, [1942] O.J. No. 441 (C.A.) .................................................. 189 Young, Re, 2011 ONCA 432 ............................................................................................................................. 484 Young v. H......
  • Mental Disorder 2023 Criminal Code of Canada Annotations (Part XX.1)
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Archive The 2023 Annotated Mental Health Provisions of the Criminal Code, Part XX.1
    • March 2, 2023
    ...v. Ontario (Attorney General), 2004 SCC 20 . 85 Valdez (Re), 2018 ONCA 657 at para. 22 [Valdez (Re)]. The court cites Young, Re, 2011 ONCA 432 at para. 86 Mazzei v. British Columbia (Director of Adult Forensic Psychiatric Services), 2006 SCC 7 at para. 16 [Mazzei]. 87 Penetanguishene M......
  • The 2024 Annotated Mental Health Provisions of the Criminal Code (Part XX.1)
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books The 2024 annotated mental health provisions of the criminal code - Part XX.1
    • February 27, 2024
    ...v. Ontario (Attorney General) , 2004 SCC 20 . 91 Valdez (Re) , 2018 ONCA 657 at para. 22 [ Valdez (Re) ]. The court cites Young, Re , 2011 ONCA 432 at para. 26. 92 Mazzei v. British Columbia (Director of Adult Forensic Psychiatric Services) , 2006 SCC 7 at para. 16 [ Mazzei ]. 93 Pene......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT