|
Civil Litigation - Anonymization. SBJ v. Ali
In SBJ v. Ali (Div Court, 2023) the Divisional Court considered an appeal under s.80(1) of the Health Care Consent Act, 1996 from a decision of the Consent and Capacity Board, which found the appellant "not capable of consenting to treatment in the form of mood stabilizing and antipsychotic medication".
In this quote the court grants the 'anonymization' of the appellant's name - here under CJA 135, 137 and the common law 'open court' doctrine:Preliminary Issue: Anonymization
[3] Ms. Perez sought an order that the case be reported by using initials in the title of proceedings and in any reporting of the case. This Court has jurisdiction to use pseudonym initials to protect the identity of parties in civil proceedings:. Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43, ss. 135, 137; Rules of Civil Procedure, R.S.O. 1990, Reg. 194, Rules 2.03 and 14.06. Counsel for Dr. Ali, Mr. McIntyre, agreed that such an order should be made.
[4] I find that on balance, the order sought protects the Appellant’s privacy concerning intimate personal health information without unduly restricting the open court principles as recently affirmed by the Supreme Court of Canada in Sherman Estate v. Donovan, 2021 SCC 25 at para 30. These proceedings and findings are public. Only the name will be protected from publication by use of anonymization.
|
