Shipman (Re)

Shipman (Re)

Because the Board's disposition had been implemented and the appellant sought no remedy, the appeal was moot and the Court declined to address the supervisory powers issue.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2017 ONCA 36
Parties
Appellant: James Shipman; Respondent: Brockville Mental Health Centre; Respondent: Attorney General of Ontario
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Under Part Xx.1 of the Criminal Code / Appeal to Court of Appeal (oral Hearing January 12, 2017)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed as moot.
Legal Topics
Supervisory Powers of Review Board, Mootness, Implementation of Disposition, Judicial Restraint
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Mental Health Law Administrative Law Appeals Supervisory Powers of Review Board Mootness Implementation of Disposition Judicial Restraint

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Shipman

Appellant

Brockville Mental Health Centre

Respondent

Attorney General of Ontario

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Under Part Xx.1 of the Criminal Code / Appeal to Court of Appeal (oral Hearing January 12, 2017)

  1. 1 Whether the Court should address the supervisory powers of the Ontario Review Board between hearings when the Board's disposition has been implemented
  2. 2 Whether the appeal is moot where the disposition has been implemented and the appellant seeks no remedy

Ratio Decidendi

Because the Board's disposition had been implemented and the appellant sought no remedy, the appeal was moot and the Court declined to address the supervisory powers issue.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed as moot.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed as moot.