Latest news with #OntarioCourtofAppeal
Winnipeg Free Press
22-05-2025
- Winnipeg Free Press
Supreme Court of Canada to examine role of rape shield law in sexual services case
OTTAWA – The Supreme Court of Canada will look at the application of the rape shield law in the case of two individuals accused of acting as pimps for a woman who worked from a house they rented. Section 276 of the Criminal Code, known as the rape shield law, limits the use of evidence about a complainant's sexual history in court proceedings. The law is intended to avoid 'twin-myth' reasoning — the idea that a complainant's prior behaviour makes them more likely to have consented to the alleged sexual activity, or less worthy of being believed. Two individuals, identified only as A.M. and M.P. due to a publication ban, faced human trafficking and sexual services offences arising out of their relationship with the complainant, known as A.K. Section 276 requires a court to determine whether, and to what extent, evidence about a complainant's sexual history may be admissible when the court is hearing a case about one or more of 14 different offences. A.M. and M.P. were acquitted of human trafficking but were convicted of advertising, procuring and receiving material benefit from sexual services. None of the offences with which the two individuals were charged are listed in section 276, and they argued on appeal that the trial judge erred in applying the provision to the proceedings. They said their cross-examination of A.K. was improperly restricted and that evidence relevant to their defences was redacted from A.K.'s preliminary inquiry testimony. A.M. and M.P. contended there were no privacy or dignity concerns with the evidence, as they were not relying on the sexual nature of A.K.'s activities. Rather, they said they were concerned with how she conducted the financial and advertising aspects of her work in the past and during the time she was involved with them. The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed their appeal and ordered a new trial on the sexual services offences. In its decision last year, the Court of Appeal said the evidence in question sought to counter the Crown's portrayal of A.K. 'as a vulnerable woman brought into the sex trade because of a drug dependency, and instead suggested that she sought out the appellants to improve her financial circumstances in part to feed her dependency.' The Crown then took its case to the Supreme Court. Following its usual practice, the top court gave no reasons for agreeing Thursday to hear the matter. No date for a hearing has been scheduled. This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 22, 2025.
Vancouver Sun
24-04-2025
- Health
- Vancouver Sun
Ontario loses battle to refuse to pay for penis-sparing vaginoplasty for non-binary resident
Ontario's top court has ruled the province must cover the cost of an out-of-country, penis-sparing vaginoplasty for a 'transgender and non-binary resident' who wishes to have both female and male genitalia. Article content Article content In a unanimous decision released this week, a three-judge panel of the Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed a lower court's ruling ordering the Ontario Health Insurance Plan to pay for the patient, identified as K.S. in court records, to undergo the novel phallus-sparing surgery at a Texas clinic. Article content Article content Article content 'K.S. is pleased with the Court of Appeal's decision, which is now the third unanimous ruling confirming that her gender affirming surgery is covered under Ontario's Health Insurance Act and its regulation,' K.S.'s lawyer, John McIntyre, said in an email to National Post. Article content The legal battle between K.S., whose sex at birth was male, dates to 2022, when the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) refused a funding request for surgery to construct a vagina while sparing the penis, a procedure this is not available in Ontario, or anywhere else in Canada. Article content OHIP argued that, because the vaginoplasty would not be accompanied by a penectomy, the procedure isn't one specifically listed in OHIP's Schedule of Benefits and therefore shouldn't be publicly funded. OHIP also argued that the requested surgery is considered experimental in Ontario and, thus, also ineligible for coverage. Article content K.S. appealed to the Health Services Appeal and Review Board, which overturned OHIP's refusal, arguing that 'vaginoplasty' should be covered, whether a penectomy, a separate procedure included on the list of publicly funded sex-reassignment surgeries, is performed or not. Article content Article content OHIP appealed that decision to the Divisional Court but lost again after the panel dismissed the province's appeal and declared the surgery, which leaves intact a functioning penis, an insured service. Article content Article content The province's latest appeal was heard on Nov. 26. The three-judge appeal court panel rejected OHIP's arguments that the proposed surgery isn't an insured service because it won't be accompanied by removal of the penis — a penectomy 'neither recommended by K.S.'s health professionals nor desired by K.S.,' according to the court's written decision. Article content K.S., who is in her early 30s, 'has experienced significant gender dysphoria since her teenage years, as well as physical, mental and economic hardships to transition her gender expression to align with her gender identity,' the court said.
National Post
24-04-2025
- Health
- National Post
Ontario loses battle to refuse to pay for penis-sparing vaginoplasty for non-binary resident
Ontario's top court has ruled the province must cover the cost of an out-of-country, penis-sparing vaginoplasty for a 'transgender and non-binary resident' who wishes to have both female and male genitalia. Article content In a unanimous decision released this week, a three-judge panel of the Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed a lower court's ruling ordering the Ontario Health Insurance Plan to pay for the patient, identified as K.S. in court records, to undergo the novel phallus-sparing surgery at a Texas clinic. Article content Article content 'K.S. is pleased with the Court of Appeal's decision, which is now the third unanimous ruling confirming that her gender affirming surgery is covered under Ontario's Health Insurance Act and its regulation,' K.S.'s lawyer, John McIntyre, said in an email to National Post. Article content The legal battle between K.S., whose sex at birth was male, dates to 2022, when the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) refused a funding request for surgery to construct a vagina while sparing the penis, a procedure this is not available in Ontario, or anywhere else in Canada. Article content OHIP argued that, because the vaginoplasty would not be accompanied by a penectomy, the procedure isn't one specifically listed in OHIP's Schedule of Benefits and therefore shouldn't be publicly funded. OHIP also argued that the requested surgery is considered experimental in Ontario and, thus, also ineligible for coverage. Article content K.S. appealed to the Health Services Appeal and Review Board, which overturned OHIP's refusal, arguing that 'vaginoplasty' should be covered, whether a penectomy, a separate procedure included on the list of publicly funded sex-reassignment surgeries, is performed or not. Article content OHIP appealed that decision to the Divisional Court but lost again after the panel dismissed the province's appeal and declared the surgery, which leaves intact a functioning penis, an insured service. Article content Article content The province's latest appeal was heard on Nov. 26. The three-judge appeal court panel rejected OHIP's arguments that the proposed surgery isn't an insured service because it won't be accompanied by removal of the penis — a penectomy 'neither recommended by K.S.'s health professionals nor desired by K.S.,' according to the court's written decision. Article content K.S., who is in her early 30s, 'has experienced significant gender dysphoria since her teenage years, as well as physical, mental and economic hardships to transition her gender expression to align with her gender identity,' the court said. Article content K.S.'s doctor submitted a request to OHIP for prior funding approval for the surgical creation of a vaginal cavity and external vulva. The request made it clear that K.S. wasn't seeking a penectomy. Article content In a letter accompanying the request, her doctor said that because K.S. is 'not completely on the 'feminine' end of the spectrum' it was important for her to have a vagina while maintaining her penis, adding that the Crane Center for Transgender Surgery in Austin, Tx.,'has an excellent reputation' for gender-affirming surgery, 'and especially with these more complicated procedures.'
CBC
04-04-2025
- CBC
Court closes 10-year legal battle over downtown Sudbury construction death
The Ontario Court of Appeal has shut down the Ministry of Labour's attempt to appeal the City of Greater Sudbury's acquittal in the case of a woman who was killed at a road construction site on Elgin Street a decade ago. The case dates back to September 2015, when 58-year-old Cécile Paquette was struck and killed by a reversing road grader while trying to cross Elgin Street in a downtown construction zone. The machine was operated by an employee of Interpaving, the contractor hired for the roadwork. Both Interpaving and the City of Greater Sudbury were charged under Ontario's Occupational Health and Safety Act. Interpaving pleaded guilty. The city contested the charges, arguing it was not directly responsible for supervising workers at the site and had taken reasonable steps to ensure safety. In August 2024, a Provincial Offences Appeal Court judge upheld an earlier trial decision, finding the city had met the standard of due diligence required by law. The Ministry of Labour sought leave to appeal that decision, but on Monday, the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the request. The ruling brings an end to a lengthy legal process involving five court decisions, including a 2023 ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada. That decision upheld an earlier ruling in the city's favour but called for a closer review of whether it had fulfilled its legal responsibilities. The city said it had "consistently upheld its position" in response to the charges and is pleased that the matter has been resolved, in a statement to CBC News. It added that while it remains mindful of the tragedy, it is firmly committed to the health and safety of residents and to maintaining public trust. With no further legal avenues available, the case is now officially closed — nearly 10 years after Paquette's death.
