I recognize that my holding as outlined above differs from the holding in James v. York University, 2015 ONSC 2234 (Div. Ct.) (“James”). In that case the court held that medical evidence is typically required to establish that an applicant’s disability was so debilitating as to prevent them from pursuing their legal rights. That medical evidence typically comes in the form of viva voce evidence from a physician, and it is a live question whether a social worker might be considered medical evidence. See James, above at paras. 45 - 50. Nonetheless, the facts in the present case are unique, highly specific and complex. The facts of the case lead me to conclude that I cannot artificially segment out the applicant’s physical health conditions, from his mental health as it relates to his trauma. I have considered the applicant as a whole person. It is trite to state, however with different facts the outcome may have been substantially different. order
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.