Shaikh v. Whitby Mental Health Centre
The Court found the record evidence — major mental illness, continued fixation on the victim, belief in a marriage contract, and expert opinions that he would stop medication without controls — adequately supported the Ontario Review Board's conclusion that the appellant continued to pose a significant threat; the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C41238
- Parties
- Appellant: Junaid Shaikh; Respondent: Whitby Mental Health Centre; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario (Ministry of the Attorney General)
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 14 October 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal From Ontario Review Board Under Criminal Code S.672.83(1) / Court of Appeal Determination on Appeal (decision Rendered)
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Detention Under Review Board, Significant Threat Finding, Fresh Evidence Admissibility, Treatment and Medication Compliance
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Junaid Shaikh
Appellant
Whitby Mental Health Centre
Respondent
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario (Ministry of the Attorney General)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Ontario Review Board Under Criminal Code S.672.83(1) / Court of Appeal Determination on Appeal (decision Rendered)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Ontario Review Board made findings not supported by the evidence
- 2 Whether the evidence as a whole supported a finding that the appellant continued to pose a significant threat
- 3 Admissibility and effect of fresh evidence (R. v. Owen)
Ratio Decidendi
The Court found the record evidence — major mental illness, continued fixation on the victim, belief in a marriage contract, and expert opinions that he would stop medication without controls — adequately supported the Ontario Review Board's conclusion that the appellant continued to pose a significant threat; the Board's decision was not unreasonable and the appeal was dismissed.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Order of the Ontario Review Board directing continued detention at Whitby Mental Health Centre subject to specified conditions is affirmed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Shaikh v. Whitby Mental Health Centre Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2004-10-14 Docket numbers C41238 Judges Simmons, Janet M.; Gillese, Eileen E.; Hennessy, Patricia C. Subject Civil Decision Content DATE: 20041014 DOCKET: C41238 IN THE MATTER OF an Order made by the Ontario Review Board pursuant to ss. 672.83(1) of the Criminal Code COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: JUNAID SHAIKH (Appellant) -and- WHITBY MENTAL HEALTH CENTRE and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO (MINISTRY OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL) (Respondents) BEFORE: SIMMONS and GILLESE JJ.A. and HENNESSY J. (ad hoc) COUNSEL: Anthony J. Balka for the appellant Sonal Gandhi for the respondent Whitby Mental Health Centre Melissa Ragsdale for the respondent Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario (Ministry of the Attorney General) HEARD AND ENDORSED: October 13, 2004 On appeal from the disposition of the Ontario Review Board dated November 14, 2003. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] The appellant appeals from an order of the Ontario Review Board directing his continued detention at the Whitby Mental Health Centre subject to certain conditions. He contends that the Ontario Review Board made findings not supported by the evidence and that the evidence as a whole did not support a finding that he continued to pose a significant threat. We reject the appellant’s submissions. [2] The index offense was criminal harassment. The evidence confirms that the appellant suffers from a major mental illness, that he had continued interest in and feelings for the victim, that he continued to believe there was a binding marriage contract in effect, and that his treating psychiatrist was of the view that he would discontinue his medication if external controls were removed. The appellant’s treating psychiatrist and the Administrator’s report both opined that the appellant continues to pose a significant threat. [3] In these circumstances, the Ontario Review Board’s conclusion that the appellant continues to pose a significant threat was not unreasonable. The evidence was sufficient to support the conditions the Ontario Review Board imposed. [4] The fresh evidence, which we admit in accordance with R. v. Owen (2003), SCC 33, confirms this. [5] The appeal is therefore dismissed.