F.G. and J.M. v. Board of Education of Scarborough, (1994) 68 O.A.C. 308 (DC)

• Judge: McMurtry, A.C.J.O., Montgomery and Dunnet, JJ.
• Court: Ontario Court of Justice General Division (Canada)
• Case Date: February 07, 1994
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1994), 68 O.A.C. 308 (DC)

F.G. v. Scarborough School Bd. (1994), 68 O.A.C. 308 (DC)

MLB headnote and full text

In The Matter Of J.M. and the Education Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter E-2

F.G. and J.M. (by his litigation guardian, F.G.) (applicants) v. The Board of Education for the City of Scarborough (respondent)

(Court File No. 53/94)

Indexed As: F.G. and J.M. v. Board of Education of Scarborough

Ontario Court of Justice

General Division

Divisional Court

McMurtry, A.C.J.O., Montgomery and Dunnet, JJ.

February 7, 1994.

Summary:

Charges were laid against a youth under the Young Offenders Act. The youth applied (1) to prohibit the Scarborough Board of Education from holding an expulsion hearing until the conclusion of the criminal charges and (2) for an order mandating the board to provide for the youth's continuing education until after the expulsion hearing.

The Ontario Divisional Court dismissed the application.

Education - Topic 750

Education authorities - School boards - Powers respecting students - Suspensions - The Ontario Education Act limited a pupil's suspension to 20 days - Section 23(2) authorized the appeal of a suspen­sion to the Board of Education, empower­ing the board to remove, confirm or mod­ify the suspension - The Ontario Divi­sional Court concluded that the board's power to modify empowered the board to extend a suspension beyond the 20 day maximum until completion of an expulsion hearing or resulting proceedings - See paragraphs 8 to 10.

Education - Topic 751

Education authorities - School Boards - Powers respecting students - Expulsions - The Ontario Divisional Court concluded that the publication ban under s. 38 of the Young Offenders Act did not prohibit a school board from conducting an expulsion hearing or expelling a pupil under the Education Act based on facts relevant to a charge under the Young Offenders Act - The court stated that a board could main­tain confidentiality by having in camera hearings - See paragraphs 11 to 16.

Education - Topic 5235

Students - Discipline and dismissal - Dismissal - [See Education - Topic 751 ].

Education - Topic 5240

Students - Discipline and dismissal - Sus­pension from school activities - [See Education - Topic 751 ].

Words and Phrases

Modify - The Ontario Divisional Court discussed the meaning of "modify" as used in s. 23(2) of the Education Act, S.O. 1993, c. 11 - See paragraphs 9, 10.

Words and Phrases

Publish - The Ontario Divisional Court discussed the meaning of "publish" as used in s. 38(1) of the Young Offenders Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. Y-1 - See paragraphs 11 to 16.

Cases Noticed:

Board of Education of Peel v. G.(W.) (1987), 59 O.R.(2d) 654 (H.C.), disapprvd. [para. 16].

Statutes Noticed:

Education Act, S.O. 1993, c. 11, sect. 23(1) [paras. 4, 5]; sect. 23(1.1) [para. 4]; sect. 23(1.2)(a) [paras. 4, 6]; sect. 23(1.2)(b) [para. 4]; sect. 23(2) [paras. 4, 7, 9]; sect. 23(2.1), sect. 23(2.2) [para. 4]; sect. 23(3) [para. 4 et seq.]; sect. 207 [para. 13].

Statutory Powers Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S-22, sect. 9 [para. 13].

Young Offenders Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. Y-1, sect. 38 [paras. 1]; sect. 38(1) [paras. 11, 13, 16].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Black's Law Dictionary (5th Ed. 1979), p. 905 [para. 9].

Counsel:

Brian Weagant and Cheryl Milne, for the applicants;

Martin Schlisizzi, for the respondent;

Howard Goldblatt, for John M. Pluscauskas and Holly M. Lipsett.

This application was heard on February 1, 1994, before McMurtry, A.C.J.O., Montgomery and Dunnet, JJ., of the Ontario Divisional Court.

Montgomery, J., delivered judgment orally for the court and released written reasons on February 7, 1994.