The Honourable Michelle O’Bonsawin's questionnaire

Under the new Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments Process and the announcement made by the Prime Minister on April 4, 2022, qualified applicants from Ontario could apply for appointment to the Supreme Court by completing a Questionnaire. The Questionnaires were used by the Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments to review candidates and submit a list of 3 to 5 individuals for consideration by the Prime Minister. Candidates were advised that parts of their Questionnaire could be made available to the public should they be chosen as the Prime Minister’s nominee.

Below are Parts 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 10 of the Questionnaire completed by the Honourable Michelle O’Bonsawin (view Bio).

Questionnaire for the Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointment Process

[...]

PART 3 - STATUTORY QUALIFICATIONS

Bar Membership(s):

Bars, Call dates, Reason for cessation of bar membership (i.e. resigned, appointed to the bench, other) and date of reinstatement (if applicable).

Member of the Law Society of Upper Canada (2000-2017) - appointed to the Superior Court of Justice of Ontario on May 18, 2017

Judicial Experience (if applicable):

(Include all dates of appointment)

Appointed to the Superior Court of Justice of Ontario, May 18, 2017

Named Local Administrative Judge responsible for the Superior Court of Justice of Ontario in L'Orignal, November 2021

Appointed Deputy Judge to the Supreme Court of Yukon and the Nunavut Court of Justice, February 3, 2022

RESIDENCE

(Please confirm the following mandatory requirement statement)

The Supreme Court Act requires that all justices shall reside in the National Capital Region or within 40 kilometers thereof. I confirm that I either currently meet this requirement or that if appointed, I will move my residence to the National Capital Region or within 40 kilometers thereof.

PART 4 – LANGUAGE

Please note that in addition to the answers to the questions set out below you may be assessed as to whether you are functionally bilingual.

Without further training, are you able to read and understand court materials in:

• English: Yes
• French: Yes

Without further training, are you able to discuss legal matters with your colleagues in:

• English: Yes
• French: Yes

Without further training, are you able to converse with counsel in court in:

• English: Yes
• French: Yes

Without further training, are you able to understand oral submission in court in:

• English: Yes
• French: Yes

PART 5 – EDUCATION

Name of Institutions, years attended, degree/diploma and year obtained:

University of Ottawa, Graduate Studies
2016-2021
PhD Law
•Specialization in Indigenous Issues and Mental Health Law
•Thesis: A Principled Approach: Mandatory Application of the Gladue Principles at Review Board Hearings

Osgoode Hall
2012-2014
LLM
•Specialization in Mental Health Law
•Thesis: Treatment Orders in the Mental Health Context-Do They Really Work?

University of Ottawa, French Common Law Program
1995-1998
LLB

Laurentian University
1992-1995
BA

Middlebury College
2020
•Abenaki Language Immersion Program Certificate

Continuing Education:

September 13-16, 2022
National Judicial Institute - Justice in Motion: National All Courts Seminar

June 9-11, 2022
Association des juristes d’expression française de l’Ontario - Annual Conference

May 18-20, 2022
National Judicial Institute - Access to Justice for Children: Implementing Child Rights

May 4-6, 2022
National Judicial Institute - Superior Court of Justice of Ontario Spring Education Seminar

November 24-26, 2021
National Judicial Institute - Criminal Jury Trials Seminar

November 16-19, 2021
Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice - 45th Annual Conference: Indigenous Peoples and the Law

November 3-5, 2021
National Judicial Institute - Superior Court of Justice of Ontario Fall Education Seminar

June 22-24, 2021
Association des juristes d’expression française de l’Ontario - Annual Conference

May 5-7, 2021
National Judicial Institute - Superior Court of Justice of Ontario Spring Education Seminar

February 17, 2021
Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice - Investigating the Indigenous Languages Act

November 26-27, 2020
County of Carleton Law Association - 40th Civil Litigation Conference

November 3-5, 2020
National Judicial Institute - Superior Court of Justice of Ontario Fall Education Seminar

November 2, 2020
National Judicial Institute - Superior Court of Justice of Ontario Family Court Branch Heidi S. Levenson Polowin Education Seminar

October 14, 2020
Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice - Overview of the Progress of the Calls to Action

January 20-24, 2020
National Judicial Institute - Judging in Your First Five Years: Criminal Law

November 6-8, 2019
National Judicial Institute - Superior Court of Justice of Ontario Fall Education Seminar

November 5, 2019
National Judicial Institute - Superior Court of Justice of Ontario Family Court Branch Heidi S. Levenson Polowin Education Seminar

July 23-25, 2019
International Academy of Law and Mental Health - XXXVIth International Congress on Law and Mental Health

Juin 21-22, 2019
Association des juristes d’expression française de l’Ontario - Annual Conference

May 8-10, 2019
National Judicial Institute - Superior Court of Justice of Ontario Spring Education Seminar

April 9-11, 2019
Action Committee on Access to Justice in Civil and Family Matters - 2019 Annual Summit

November 27-30, 2018
National Judicial Institute - Hearing and Deciding Charter Issues

November 16-18, 2018
County of Carleton Law Association - 38th Civil Litigation Conference

November 7-9, 2018
National Judicial Institute - Superior Court of Justice of Ontario Fall Education Seminar

November 6, 2018
National Judicial Institute - Superior Court of Justice of Ontario Family Court Branch Heidi S. Levenson Polowin Education Seminar

May 2-4, 2018
National Judicial Institute - Superior Court of Justice of Ontario Spring Education Seminar

April 7-13, 2018
National Judicial Institute and Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice - Seminar for New Federally Appointed Judges: Spring Program

March 21-23, 2018
National Judicial Institute - Criminal Law Seminar

March 20, 2018
National Judicial Institute - Criminal Law Fundamentals: Issues in the Law of Sexual Assault

November 8-10, 2017
National Judicial Institute - Superior Court of Justice of Ontario Fall Education Seminar

November 7, 2017
National Judicial Institute - Superior Court of Justice of Ontario Family Court Branch Heidi S. Levenson Polowin Education Seminar

October 21-27, 2017
National Judicial Institute and Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice - Seminar for New Federally Appointed Judges: Fall Program

Academic Awards:

PhD thesis nominated for the University of Ottawa's Governor General's Gold Medal and the Pierre Laberge Prize (2022)

Inducted into the University of Ottawa Common Law Honour Society (2019)

School of Abenaki Scholarship - Middlebury College (2021)

PART 6 – PROFESSIONAL AND EMPLOYMENT HISTORY

Please include a chronology of work experience, starting with the most recent and showing employers' names and dates of employment. For legal work, indicate areas of work or specialization with years and, if applicable, indicate if they have changed.

Legal Work Experience:

Deputy Judge
Nunavut Court of Justice and Supreme Court of the Yukon Territory
February 2022-present
•Preside mostly over criminal prosecutions of indictable offences

Local Administrative Judge
Superior Court of Justice of Ontario, L’Orignal
November 2021-present
•Manage the administration of the court
•Preside mostly in French over a variety of matters including criminal prosecutions of indictable offences, bail reviews, civil lawsuits, family law disputes and child protection matters
•Preside at the appeal level - summary conviction appeals from the Ontario Court of Justice and appeals from the Small Claims Court

Judge
Superior Court of Justice of Ontario, Ottawa
May 2017-present
•Preside over criminal prosecutions of indictable offences, bail reviews, family law and child protection disputes and civil litigation related to medial and employment issues
•Preside at the appeal level - summary conviction appeals from the Ontario Court of Justice and appeals from the Small Claims Court
•Sit as a judge on the panel at the Divisional Court that hears statutory appeals from administrative tribunals in the province
•Specialization in Gladue principles, Indigenous issues, mental health law, and labour and employment law

General Counsel
Legal Services - Royal Ottawa Health Care Group
March 2009-May 2017
•Specialization in mental health law, Indigenous issues, Gladue principles, labour, employment, human rights, privacy and access to information law

Counsel
Legal Affairs - Canada Post
July 2000-March 2009
•Specialization in labour and employment, Indigenous issues, human rights, privacy, access to information and official languages law

Part-Time Professor
French Common Law Program - University of Ottawa
2002-2003
•Les autochtones et le droit

Researcher
Legal Services - Royal Canadian Mounted Police
July 1999-May 2000 and May 1997-March 1998
•Specialization in criminal and privacy law

File Reviewer / Caseworker
Aboriginal Legal Services - University of Ottawa Legal Aid Clinic
November 1999-March 2000 and September 1997-May 1998
•Specialization in Indigenous law

Summer Student
Office of the Minister - Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
May-August 1996
• Specialization in Indigenous law

Non-Legal Work Experience:

While attending Laurentian University, I worked as a tour guide at Big Nickel Mine and as a cook and server at a chip stand. I also worked as a substitute teacher with Conseil des écoles séparées catholiques du district de Sudbury and I taught French and English at Cambrian College’s Learning Centre.

As a high school student, I babysat children and worked as a cashier at a department store and a hardware store. I also took part in a co-op student placement and worked as a legal assistant in a law firm.

Other Professional Experience:

(List all bar associations, legal or judicial-related committees of which you are or have been a member, and give the titles and dates of any offices which you have held in such groups.)

• Partner Judge for Afghanistan Women Judges, International Association of Women Judges (2022-present)
• Council Member of the Canadian Superior Court Judges' Association (2021-present)
• Chair of the Education Committee, Canadian Superior Court Judges’ Association (2020-present)
• Member of the Indigenous Issues Committee, Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (2020-present)
• Member of the Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Committee, Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (2020-present)
• Delegate to the International Association of Judges, Canadian Superior Court Judges Association (2020-present)
• Chair of the Indigenous Circle Committee, Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice (2017-present)
• Member of the Technology Committee, Canadian Superior Court Judges’ Association (2018-2021)
• Chair of the Ontario Justice Education Network in Ottawa (2018-2021)
• Member of the Planning Committee, Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice, 45th Annual Conference: Indigenous Peoples and the Law (2019-2021)
• Member of the Planning Committee, Association des juristes d'expression française de l'Ontario, Annual Conference 2021 (2020-2021)
• Member of the Planning Committee, Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice, 43rd Annual Conference: Justice and Mental Health (2018)
• Member of the Ontario Justice Education Network Subcommittee for Mock Trials (2017-2018)
• Member of the Mental Health and the Law in Ontario Toolkit Advisory Group (2015-2017)
• Member of the Ontario Hospital Association Hospital Counsel Connection (2009-2017)
• Member of the Hospital Counsel Network, Forensic Litigation (2009-2017)
• Member of the Ontario Hospital Association Mental Health and Addiction Provincial Leadership Council working group (2015)
• Member of the Ontario Hospital Association Law Commission of Ontario Project (2015)
• Member of the Canadian Association of Counsel to Employers’ Human Rights Committee (2012-2013)

Pro Bono Activities:

• Observer Member of the Membership Committee, Odanak First Nation (2022-present)
• Speaker at conferences at the national level (2017-present)
• Member of many committees (2012-present)
• Mentor students of the University of Ottawa’s French Common Law Program (2017-present)
• Mentor female lawyers in Ottawa, Toronto and Hamilton (2017-present)
• Mentor lawyers as part of the mentorship programs of the Association des juristes d’expression française de l’Ontario, Canadian Bar |Association, the Ontario Bar Association and the Canadian Corporate Counsel Association, and to female law students as part of the University of Ottawa Women’s Legal Mentorship Program (2009-present)
• Member of the fundraising committee of the Goodfellow Scholarship Program for the Kenya Olympic High School (2016-2017)
• Lawyer coach for the Collège catholique Samuel-Genest team, OBA/OJEN Law Day Secondary School Mock Trial (2015-2017)
• Volunteer at École élémentaire catholique des Pionniers (2008-2012)

Teaching and Continuing Education:

(List all legal or judicial educational organizations and activities you have been involved with e.g. teaching course at a Law Faculty, National Judicial Institute, Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice, etc).

September 14, 2022
National Judicial Institute, Justice in Motion: National All Courts Seminar
Quebec, QC
• Cultural Competency

 

August 1, 2022
Franco-Jeunes de Terre-Neuve et du Labrador, Camp Justice Jeunesse Terre-Neuve
Saint-John, NS
•Discours d'ouverture

 

May 18, 2022
National Judicial Institute, Access to Justice for Children: Implementing Child Rights
Quebec, QC
• Are Gladue Principles Relevant in Child Protection Matters?

 

May 12, 2022
National Academy of Arbitrators, Annual Conference
Toronto, ON
•Diversity Initiatives on the Bench

 

May 6, 2022
Institut Philippe-Pinel
Montreal, QC
•Les principes Gladue et les commissions d’examen

 

April 21, 2022
Legacies of Patriation
Edmonton, AB
•Moderator: Indigenous Rights, Jurisdiction and Sovereignty at 40

 

March 31, 2022
Ontario Bar Association, Foundations in Judicial Competencies
Toronto, ON
•Perspectives of a Judge

 

March 31, 2022
Ontario Justice Education Network, Braiding Diversity into Justice
Kitchener, ON
•Women and the Law

 

December 16, 2021
Canadian Bar Association, Judges Section
Ottawa, ON
•Reconciliation

 

November 30, 2021
National Judicial Institute, Court of Queen’s Bench for Saskatchewan Education Seminar
Saskatoon, SK
•Cultural Competence: Reconciliation

 

November 19, 2021
Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice, 45th Annual Conference: Indigenous Peoples and the Law
Vancouver, BC
•The Proper Application of Gladue Principles

 

November 18, 2021
Federation of Ontario Law Associations, Fall Plenary
Toronto, ON
•Indigenous Community Council Program

 

November 18, 2021
County of Carleton Law Association, 41st Civil Litigation Conference
Ottawa, ON
•Summary Judgments

 

October 28, 2021
Department of Justice, National Virtual Conference on Language Rights in Prosecutions
Ottawa, ON
•Gladue Principles

October 22, 2021
Association des juristes d’expression française de l’Ontario, Journées du droit 2021 - École secondaire catholique Garneau
Ottawa, ON
•Panellist, Les experts

October 22, 2021
Law Society of Manitoba, 2021 Child Protection Program
Winnipeg, MB
•Gladue Principles in the Child Protection Context

September 23, 2021
Osgoode Hall Law School, The Principle of Good Faith in Contracts: Essential Updates and Practical Analysis in Canadian Contract Law
Toronto, ON
•A View from the Bench: What Every Counsel Should Know About Good Faith

 

August 30, 2021
Ontario Bar Association, Programme de pratique de droit
Ottawa, ON
•Guest of Honour, Opening Remarks

 

June 22-24, 2021
Association des juristes d’expression française de l’Ontario, Congrès annuel 2021
Ottawa, ON
•Co-president with Justice Paul Rouleau
•Discussion Session with Law and Articling Students
•Panelist, Inclusion and Diversity

 

April 22, 2021
Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice, ClAJ & Akwesasne Justice Training Program
Akwesasne, ON
•Sentencing Principles in the Canadian Court System

 

March 25, 2021
Department of Justice, AAP Ottawa Wellness Team
Ottawa, ON
•Mental Health Law

 

March 22, 2021
University of Ottawa, French Common Law Program
Ottawa, ON
•La santé mentale et le litige

 

November 26, 2020
County of Carleton Law Association, 40th Civil Litigation Conference
Ottawa, ON
•Ally-ship and Combating Systemic Discrimination

October 14, 2020
Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice, Webinar
Montreal, QC
•Moderator: Overview of the Progress of the Calls to Action with the Honourable Murray Sinclair

 

June 17, 2020
Retraite en action, Workshop
Ottawa, ON
•Le système judiciaire

 

October 28, 2019
Law Society of Ontario, Access to Justice Week
Toronto, ON
•Access to Justice for Indigenous People

 

October 10, 2019
Cour supérieure de justice du Québec, Assemblée générale annuelle: La fonction de juger dans une société diversifiée
Quebec, QC
•Les peuples autochtones du Canada: enjeux pour la justice

 

July 25, 2019
International Academy of Law and Mental Health, XXXVIth International Congress on Law and Mental Health
Rome, Italy
•The Need to Maintain the Forensic Legal System in Canada

 

June 21, 2019
Association des juristes d’expression française de l’Ontario, Congrès annuel 2019
Sudbury, ON
•Accès à la justice via l’accès au judiciaire

 

April 9, 2019
Action Committee on Access to Justice in Civil and Family Matters, 2019 Annual Summit
Montreal, QC
•Indigenous People in the Justice System: the Gladue Principles

 

April 2, 2019
University of Ottawa, Common Law Program Presentation
Ottawa, ON
•La santé mentale et le litige: méthodes de rechange, règlement des différends

 

March 7, 2019
The Advocates’ Society, Women in Litigation Symposium
Ottawa, ON
•Doing it Her Way

 

November 17, 2018
County of Carleton Law Association, 38th Civil Litigation Conference
Mont Tremblant, QC
•Jurists in Chairs Drinking Coffee Panel

 

October 25, 2018
Minister of Justice, Forum on Diversity on the Bench
Toronto, ON
•Panelist

 

October 17, 2018
Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice, 43rd Annual Conference: Justice and Mental Health
Ottawa, ON
•Cultural Diversity: Bias in Forensic Risk Assessment

 

October 11, 2018
Association des juristes d’expression française de l’Ontario, Atelier de plaidoirie|
Ottawa, ON
•Panelist: Les témoins experts

September 2018
University of Ottawa, French Common Law Program
Ottawa, ON
•Le droit de la psychiatrie légale

 

September 26, 2018
Superior Court of Justice of Ontario, Master’s Fall Conference
Ottawa, ON
•Panelist, Mental Health

 

May 31, 2018
Ontario Bar Association, Trusts & Estates Dinner
Ottawa, ON
•General Capacity Mental Health Assessments

 

May 10, 2018
Royal Ottawa Health Care Group, Forensic Conference
Ottawa, ON
•Culturally Appropriate Care for the Treatment and Recovery of First Nations Clients

 

April 4, 2018
Franco-Jeunes de Terre-Neuve et du Labrador
Saint John’s, NFLD
•Les autochtones et la santé mentale

 

January 11, 2018
Fédération de la jeunesse canadienne française, Parlement jeunesse pancanadien 2018
Ottawa, ON
•Discours du trône et allocution

 

November 18, 2017
Canadian Bar Association, Administrative Law and Labour and Employment Law Conference
Ottawa, ON
•Judges’ Panel

 

May 2017
University of Ottawa, Health Law Students’ Association
Ottawa, ON
•Career in Health Law and Policy

 

May 2017
Conference - Lancaster House 2017 Human Rights and Labour Law
Ottawa, ON
•Co-president et moderator

 

March 2017
Royal Ottawa Health Care Group
Ottawa, ON
•Delegation of Authority: Ontario Review Board Disposition Orders

 

October 2016
Environment and Climate Change Canada Executive Leadership Council
Ottawa, ON
•Mental Health in the Workplace

 

August 2016
Canadian Superior Court Judges Association, Annual Meeting
Ottawa, ON
•Judgment: The Role of the Judiciary in Mental Health Appeals

March 2016
University of Ottawa, French Common Law Program
Ottawa, ON
•La santé mentale et le litige: méthodes de rechange, règlement des différends

 

March 2016
Royal Ottawa Health Care Group
Ottawa, ON
•Bill 122 : Amendments to the Mental Health Act Regarding Long-Term Involuntary Patients

 

March 2016
North Bay Regional Health Centre
North Bay, ON
•Consent and Capacity Board Appeals to the Superior Court of Justice: Learn How to Navigate Within This System

 

February 2016
University of Ottawa, University Health Law Students’ Association
Ottawa, ON
•Career in Health Law and Policy

 

February 2016
Royal Ottawa Health Care Group, Grand Rounds
Ottawa, ON
•Psychiatric Disability and Employment Law: A Workshop for Clinicians

 

December 2015
County of Carleton Law Association, Mental Health Conference
Ottawa, ON
•Mental Health: The Struggle with Stigma

 

November 2015
University of Ottawa, French Common Law Program
Ottawa, ON
•L'expérience pratique en droit du travail

 

June 2015
Royal Health Care Group, First Annual Patient Safety Half-Day Conference
Ottawa, ON
•Lessons Learned From Coroners' Inquests

 

May 2015
University of Ottawa, Criminal Law Conference
Ottawa, ON
•Bill C-14- Amendments to Part XX.1 of the Criminal Code: A Knee-Jerk Reaction

 

May 2015
Ontario Hospital Association, Mental Health and the Law Conference
Ottawa, ON
•Health Care Consent Act: Current Issues

 

March 2015
Canadian Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Annual Conference
Quebec, QC
•Forensic Patients: Diminished Expectation of Privacy Regarding Internet Access Privileges

 

March 2015
University of Ottawa, French Common Law Program
Ottawa, ON
•Droit de la santé mentale

 

March 2015
Institut Philippe-Pinel
Montreal, QC
•Les principes Gladue: application et conséquences pour les patients sous la gouvernance de la Commission ontarienne d’examen

 

February 2015
Royal Ottawa Health Care Group, Forensic Seminar Series
Ottawa, ON
•Bill C-14: A Knee-Jerk Reaction

 

February 2015
University of Ottawa, Faculty of Medicine
Ottawa, ON
•When and How to Use Legal Services (Core Curriculum for 4th Year Psychiatry Residents)

 

2009-2015
Royal Ottawa Health Care Group, Annual Labour Law Update
Ottawa, ON
•Recent Caselaw in Labour Relations

 

November 2014
National Judicial Institute, Superior Court of Justice Fall Education Session
Toronto, ON
•Treatment and Compliance: What Works?

 

November 2014
University of Ottawa, Common Law Program
Ottawa, ON
•Practical Experience in Labour Law

 

November 2014
Canadian Bar Association & Canadian Corporate Counsel Association Conference
Ottawa, ON
•Privacy Law in the Health Care Profession

 

September 2014
The Canadian Institute’s Forum for Corporate Counsel
Toronto, ON
•Creating a Collaborative Work Environment: Establishing How the Legal Team Relates to Other Departments
•Panelist, Q & A with Industry Leaders

 

September 2014
Canadian Psychiatric Association, Annual Conference
Toronto, ON
•Psychiatric Disability and Employment Law: A Workshop for Clinicians

 

May 2014
Ontario Review Board, 14th Annual Education Session
Toronto, ON
•A Review of Charter Issues and the Jurisdiction of the Ontario Review Board
•Gladue Principles: Application and Implications for Patients Under the Review Board

 

May 2014
Canadian Policy and Procedure Network, Annual Conference
Ottawa, ON
•The Cohort of Four: Synergistic Human Resources Policies

 

March 2014
Odanak First Nation
Odanak, QC
•Des clés à la portée de tous

 

March 2014
Canadian Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Annual Conference
Lake Louise, AB
•Keynote Speaker, Mental Health Law: A System in Transition- We’ve Come a Long Way Baby!

 

February 2014
University of Ottawa, Common Law Program
Ottawa, ON
•Bill C-14: An Act to Amend the Criminal Code and the National Defence Act

 

February 2014
University of Ottawa, Health Law Students’ Association
Ottawa, ON
•Mental Health Litigation

 

November 2013
Canadian Mental Health Association, 4th Biennial Human Services and Justice Conference
Toronto, ON
•Gladue Principles and the Socioeconomic Marginalization

 

November 2013
Insight Information, Mental Health in the Workplace Conference
Ottawa, ON
• Removing the Stigma: Practical Ways to Help Employees Return to Work

 

May 2013
Ontario Hospital Association, Mental Health and the Law Conference
Toronto, ON
•Legal Frameworks for Hospitalization & Assessment Under the Mental Health Act

 

March 2013
British Columbia Psychological Association, 9th Annual Pacific Psychiatry and the Law Conference
Vancouver, BC
•Gladue Principles and Their Applications in the Criminal Justice and Mental Health Systems: A Symposium

 

February 2013
Royal Ottawa Health Care Group, Forensic Seminar Series
Ottawa, ON
•Basic Law for Psychiatrists

 

February 2013
University of Ottawa, Common Law Program
Ottawa, ON
•Mental Health Litigation

 

May 2012
Lancaster House, Pre-Conference Workshop: Mental Illness in the Workplace
Ottawa, ON
•Mental Health, Labour/Employment and Human Rights Law

 

2009
Canada Post, Annual Labour Relations Conference
Ottawa, ON
•New Trends in Labour Law

 

2008
Algonquin College, Aboriginal Law Conference
Ottawa, ON
•Aboriginal Law

 

March 2008
Canada Post, International Women’s Day
Ottawa, ON
•Women and the Law

 

2006
Canadian Banker’s Association
Ottawa, ON
•Privacy Laws’ Impact on Businesses

Community and Civic Activities:

(List all organizations of which you are a member and any offices held (with dates).

Board Work:

2019-present
Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice
Board Member and member of the Governance and Education Committees

2015-2017
University of Ottawa
Member of the Board of Governors and member of the Executive Committee

2001-2003
University of Ottawa Legal Aid Clinic, Aboriginal Legal Services
Board Member

Community and Civic Activities:

• Partner Judge for Afghanistan Women Judges, International Association of Women Judges (2022-present)
• Observer member of the Membership Committee, Odanak First Nation (2022-present)
• Mentor students of the University of Ottawa’s French Common Law Program (2017-present)
• Mentor female lawyers in Ottawa, Toronto and Hamilton (2017-present)
• Mentor lawyers as part of the mentorship programs of the Association des juristes d’expression française de l’Ontario, the Canadian Bar

Association, the Ontario Bar Association and the Canadian Corporate Counsel Association

• Mentor female law students as part of the University of Ottawa Women’s Legal Mentorship Program (2009-present)
• Appointed by the Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Ontario as a member of Ottawa’s Community Liaison and Resources Committee

(2016-2018)

• Member of the fundraising committee of the Goodfellow Scholarship Program for the Kenya Olympic High School (2016 - 2017)
• Member of the Gladue Report Writing Committee (2014-2017)
• Member of the organizing committee for the events on National Aboriginal Day at Canada Post Corporation (2004-2009) and the Royal

Ottawa Health Care Group (2010-2017)

• Lawyer Coach for the Collège catholique Samuel-Genest team, OBA/OJEN Law Day Secondary School Mock Trial (2015-2017)
• Member of the committee between the Royal Ottawa Health Care Group and Algonquin College for the provision of mental health services to Aboriginal students (2010-2011)
• Volunteer at Ecole élémentaire catholique des Pionniers (2008-2012)
• Legal Member of the Aboriginal Legal Services at the University of Ottawa Legal Clinic (2001-2003)

Honours and Awards:

• Inducted into the University of Ottawa Common Law Honour Society (2019)
• Nominated for the Laura Legge Award (2017)
• Profiled in Tête à tête: Improving Understanding in the Nation’s Courtrooms (2016)
• Recipient of Lexpert magazine’s Rising Stars Award honouring Canada’s leading lawyers under 40 (2013)
• Recognized as a leading business woman by Canada Post on International Women’s Day (2008)
• Profiled as having significant leadership potential in the field of law by Laurentian University magazine (2006)

PART 7 - LEGAL EXPERIENCE AND EXPERTISE

List and explain your areas of legal expertise:

Through my experience gained as a First Nations' lawyer, I have brought to the judiciary my expertise in Gladue principles, Indigenous issues, mental health law, labour and employment law, as well as my comprehensive understanding of court procedures.

I was hired as General Counsel to the Royal Ottawa Health Care Group (Royal) due to my expertise in labour relations. The Royal administers two mental health centres: one in Ottawa and one in Brockville. There are five unions located across both sites. I negotiated the transfer of union positions and layoffs from the Royal’s Brockville site to another institution. I provided extensive legal advice to the Labour Relations and Human Resources departments regarding labour and employment law issues, in addition to negotiating many settlements. I appeared as counsel at arbitrations as per the provisions of the various collective agreements, the Ontario Labour Relations Board and the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario. I also successfully defended the Royal before the Ontario Court of Justice with respect to Occupational Health and Safety Act charges. Lastly, I also acted as an employer nominee on various arbitration boards.

In addition, I provided strategic advice to physicians and to the Person in Charge of the Royal regarding mental health law issues. I appeared as counsel before the Consent and Capacity Board and the Ontario Review Board and argued mental health appeals before the Superior Court of Justice of Ontario and the Court of Appeal for Ontario.

Since the Royal is a teaching hospital, I was also able to perform extensive research regarding Indigenous issues, Gladue principles and Indigenous accused appearing before the Ontario Review Board.

As a lawyer at Canada Post, I worked extensively in labour relations. I provided strategic legal advice to clients and was part of collective bargaining teams that were responsible for negotiating new collective agreements. I drafted language that was incorporated into the collective agreements. I also represented Canada Post at arbitration hearings and before the Canadian Industrial Relations Board.

In addition, I provided strategic legal advice in employment law matters to Canada Post’s Human Resources department. I drafted contracts, negotiated settlements and litigated matters before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, the Canada Employment Insurance Commission and the Superior Court of Justice.

I also worked as a file reviewer and caseworker at the Aboriginal Legal Services within the University of Ottawa Legal Aid Clinic. I performed research and provided advice regarding Indigenous law matters. This acquired knowledge led me to teach two semesters of the course, “Les autochtones et le droit”, at the University of Ottawa, French Common Law ProgramFrench.

As a trial judge in the Superior Court of Justice of Ontario, I have developed significant knowledge and expertise in our three areas of work: criminal, family and civil litigation. I have significant legal expertise in sexual assault matters. I am also assigned to the estate matters’ team on our court, based on my past experience in estate matters as General Counsel at the Royal. I act as a judge in all aspects of the legal court process from case conferences to trials. I fully understand and appreciate the legal principles and procedures in court-related matters. In addition, as a judge of the Superior Court of Justice of Ontario, I hear and determine summary conviction appeals from the Ontario Court of Justice and appeals from the Small Claims Court.

Judges of the Superior Court of Justice can assume a rotation with the Divisional Court. The Divisional Court is an appellate court and a branch of the Superior Court of Justice of Justice. This Court hears appeals from some administrative tribunals and has some jurisdiction regarding civil and family appeals. As a member of the Divisional Court, I sit as a judge alone and on a panel of three judges where my expertise in administrative law is very useful. Similar to other appeal courts, when we sit as a panel, we meet to discuss our views of the case and determine who will write the decision. I have written Divisional Court decisions.

I began my PhD in law at the University of Ottawa in September 2016 prior to my appointment to the judiciary in May 2017. After joining the judiciary, notwithstanding the heavy workload of the court, I continued my PhD program by completing extensive research in Indigenous traditional healing concepts in health, the application of Gladue principles to Indigenous not criminally responsible or unfit to stand trial accused within the court system and within the Review Boards. I later completed my written and oral examinations which assessed my knowledge of the directed readings. I wrote my thesis (A Principled Approach: Mandatory Application of the Gladue Principles at Review Board Hearings) over a period of one year and then successfully defended it in December 2021. I am very proud to say that I have completed my PhD!

I am a frequent guest speaker regarding reconciliation, Indigenous issues, Gladue principles and mental health law. For example, I have been a guest speaker at conferences held by the Association des juristes d’expression française de l’Ontario, the Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice, the National Judicial Institute, the Action Committee on Access to Justice in Civil and Family Matters, the University of Ottawa and the County of Carleton Law Association. Due to my specialty in mental health law, I created a series of judicial resource documents, such as the Mental Health Checklist for the Superior Court of Justice of Ontario, a checklist for the Ontario Court of Justice (Mental Health Court) and the Better Mental Health: Resource Guide, which is used by the judiciary of the Superior Court of Justice in the East Region.

List and explain other legal areas that you have experience in:

In addition to my role as General Counsel at the Royal Ottawa Health Care Group (Royal), I managed the Access to Information portfolio. I oversaw the administration of all access to information requests received by the Royal and prepared responses to the requesters and to the office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. I negotiated many service contracts between the Royal and independent parties. I also reviewed research and grant agreements for the Royal’s Institute of Mental Health Research.

As Counsel at Canada Post, I provided legal advice regarding the Official Languages Act, the Privacy Act, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, the Access to Information Act, the Personal Health Information Protection Act and the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. I was responsible for the legal arguments provided in response to access to information requests received by Canada Post from Public Works (the Minister for Public Works was also responsible for Canada Post, a Crown corporation). I also drafted Canada Post’s responses to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada.

During my career as a lawyer, I worked in both federal and provincial jurisdictions.

List all publications, including online and opinion editorials, with dates and citations or links, if available:

• Canadian Bar Association, Profile: Madam Justice Project, 2022
• Author, A Principled Approach: Mandatory Application of the Gladue Principles at Review Board Hearings, to be published, 2023
• ONFR+, Interview, Vérité et réconciliation - Une journée pour réfléchir, September 30, 2021
• Podcast with Emilie Monnet, Marguerite: la traversée, Episode 4, December 2021 (https://spoti.fi/3oI6vKi)
• Podcast, Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice, Episode 40: The Application of Gladue Principles Beyond the Criminal Law Context, November 29, 2021 (https://ciaj-icaj.ca/en/podcasts/the-application-of-gladue-principles-beyond-the-criminal-law-context/)
• Jurivision, Interview, Believing in your dreams, November 2020 (https://jurivision.ca/believing-in-your-dreams/?lang=en)
• Author, Access to Justice and Gladue Reports: We All Have a Role to Play, Lawyer’s Daily, September 23, 2020 (https://www.thelawyersdaily.ca/articles/21097/access-to-justice-gladue-reports-we-all-have-role-to-play-michelle-o-bonsawin)
• Radio-Canada, Ici Nord de l'Ontario, Interview, Journée internationale du droit des femmes: Cinq portraits inspirants au féminin pluriel, March 8, 2020
• Flip Télévision franco-ontarienne, Interview, Première juge autochtone à la Cour supérieure de l’Ontario, April 2019, (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLvmzsa5n10)
• Justice.TV, Interview, The TRC Calls to Action and Reconciliation, October 2018 (https://vimeo.com/473866641/2bc2df6184)
• Laïla Héloua et Corinne De Vailly, Dix filles allumées, 10 parcours inspirants (Michelle O’Bonsawin, Juge à la Cour supérieure de l’Ontario, pages 30-33), Bayard Canada, October 2018,
• Télévision franco-ontarienne, Interview, From Classroom to Courtroom, April 16, 2018, (https://www.tfo.org/en/universe/tfo-247/101363821/from-classroom-to-courtroom)
• Le téléjournal de Radio Canada, Interview: Une première juge abénaquise, December 14, 2017, (https://www.facebook.com/radiocanada.info/videos/une-premi%C3%A8re-juge-ab%C3%A9naquise/1811684178876581/)
• La voix du nord, Chronique, Ce n’est pas parce qu’on vient de Hanmer qu’on ne peut pas rêver grand, June 28, 2017
• Le Droit, Chronique, Madame la juge, June 20, 2017
• Author, A Principled Approach: Applying the Gladue Principles at the Ontario Review Board, National Judicial Institute Aboriginal and Indigenous Law Subject Collection, June 2018
• Author, Bill C-14 - Amendments to Part XX.l of the Criminal Code: A Knee-Jerk Reaction, (2016) CCLR 53
• Co-Author, Mental Health Checklist: A Guide for Members of the Judiciary, 2016
• Author, Better Mental Health: A Judicial Resource Guide, 2016 and Better Mental Health: A Resource Guide, 2016
• Co-Author, Mental Health Checklist: A Guide for Members of the Ontario Court of Justice, 2016
• Co-Author, Mental Health Checklist: A Guide for Members of the Ontario Judiciary, 2015

List all presentations that you have given over the past 10 years (that are not included under Teaching and Continuing Education; e.g presentations to members of the public, etc.):

SKILLS ASSESSMENT

1-List and forward, in separate e-mails for each document, five decisions, legal documents (factums, etc.) or publications that you have written that demonstrate your analytical skills, your ability to resolve complex legal problems and your excellence in legal writing. Provide, below, a synopsis of no more than 300 words for each decision/document/publication and explain your reason for selecting it.

Synopsis 1:

Callow v. Zollinger et al., 2017 ONSC 5992; affd C.M. Callow Inc. v. Zollinger, 2020 SCC 45

ln 2012, Baycrest entered into a two-year winter maintenance contract and a separate summer maintenance contract with Callow. The winter maintenance agreement entitled Baycrest to terminate the agreement on 10 days' written notice. In early 2013, Baycrest decided to terminate the winter maintenance agreement but chose not to inform Callow of its decision. During the spring and summer of 2013, Callow and Baycrest discussed the renewal of the winter maintenance agreement. Callow was led to believe that he would likely obtain the renewal and Baycrest was satisfied with its services. Callow performed extra work beyond the summer maintenance contract at no charge. Baycrest gave Callow 10-days' notice of its decision to terminate the winter maintenance agreement in September 2013.

On November 27, 2017, 1 found in favour of Callow for breach of contract because Baycrest actively deceived Callow from the time the decision was made to terminate the winter maintenance agreement to the actual termination notice provided afterwards. My decision placed Callow in the same position as if the breach of the agreement had not occurred.

On November 9, 2018, the Court of Appeal of Ontario allowed Baycrest's appeal.

On December 18, 2020, the Supreme Court of Canada allowed Callow's appeal, set aside the order of the Court of Appeal and reinstated my judgment.

I chose this decision because it demonstrates my analytical skills and my preparedness to interpret cases without pre-conceived limits and to expand legal principles when the case merits such a treatment. This case is significant since it led to the Supreme Court of Canada's clarification of the duty of honest performance. This duty, formulated in Bhasin v. Hrynew, applies to all contracts and requires that parties must not lie or otherwise knowingly mislead each other about matters directly linked to the performance of the contract.

Synopsis 2:

Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario v. York Region District School Board, [2020] OJ. No. 2714 (Div. Ct.)

The Applicant brought an Application for judicial review of an Arbitrator's decision. The latter decided the Principal's search of the Grievors' log regarding events in the workplace was not a breach of the Grievors' reasonable expectation of privacy. The Grievors' log was created and stored in their private Gmail accounts which were accessed on the Board’s computer. The issue focused on balancing the reasonable expectation of privacy of employees with the duty of the employer to manage the workplace.

I found the Arbitrator reasonably concluded the Grievors had a reasonable expectation of privacy; however, the applicable expectation of privacy was a diminished one. The Arbitrator properly applied and balanced the diminished expectation of privacy against the duty of the employer to manage the workplace. The Arbitrator arrived at a reasonable conclusion. I also noted there is a difference between a workplace environment and a matter in a criminal context. As such, an employee in a workplace environment does not have an automatic right to protection against an unreasonable search and seizure as per s. 8 of the Charter.

This decision allowed me to use my significant experience and knowledge in labour law to draft the Divisional Court's majority decision. This decision is a first appellate review determination in Ontario of the issue of searching an employee's private Gmail account located on an employer's computer and whether it consisted of a breach of the Grievors' reasonable expectation of privacy.

Synopsis 3:

1. c. F.J., 2018 ONSC 4587; affd 2021 ONCA 268

In this matter, N.J. alleged that her uncle, F.J., sexually assaulted her when she was twelve years old. FJ. elected to proceed at trial in French. The trial consisted of many witnesses testifying before me as well as numerous exhibits presented by the Crown and the Defence. Accordingly, this matter required a comprehensive timeline to establish the sequence of events and a thorough credibility assessment. At the end of the trial, I found FJ. guilty of all charges.

I chose to highlight this decision since it demonstrates my ability to appropriately write a lengthy criminal decision in French. This decision shows that I can think, understand and analyze evidence in French. This was a difficult case given the nature of the allegations and the number of witnesses. Furthermore, this decision highlights my capability to perform an extensive credibility assessment of the various witnesses' evidence in a clear manner. It also demonstrates my analytical skills and my ability to deal with complex issues in a comprehensible manner.

Synopsis 4:

1. v. D.B., 2017 ONSC 7640
2. v. D.B. is an appeal from a decision of a trial judge of the Ontario Court of Justice. The trial judge stayed the charges against the Appellant for unconstitutional delay contrary to s. 11(b) of the Charter.

The Appellant's almost two-month-old son had been admitted to the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario on two occasions. The physicians examined the child and took X-rays at admission on both occasions. It was determined that the child had two broken ankles, three broken ribs and other suspicious bruising on his body. The child's father was subsequently charged for having caused the injuries. The trial judge later stayed the proceedings because the Jordan timelines had not been met and attributed the trial delay to the Crown.

The Crown appealed the decision. In the appeal, I concluded that there had been an error, and I found that the six-month delay fell squarely at the feet of the Defence. This led to the trial timeline of 20.5 months being reduced to 14.5 months instead. Consequently, the trial delay fell within the allowable 18-month trial timeline set out in Jordan.

I chose this decision to demonstrate my ability to act as an appeal judge and my capacity to properly analyze the required trial timeline established by the Jordan regime which had been recently determined by the Supreme Court of Canada. At the hearing of this appeal before me, there was limited guidance on how to apply Jordan. Trial timeline cases require thorough consideration due to the calculations and the exceptions listed in the Jordan decision.

1. v. D.B. demonstrates my ability to carefully establish a trial timeline reflective of all facts and events when applying the trial timeline required by Jordan. It also shows my ability to carefully consider legal arguments regarding the Jordan decision's application to the matter before me.

Synopsis 5:

Bill C-14 - Amendments to Part XX.l of the Criminal Code: A Knee-Jerk Reaction, (2016) CCLR 53

In 2015, the University of Ottawa Criminal Law Conference invited me to give a presentation regarding Bill C-14: An Act to Amend the Criminal Code and the National Defence Act (mental disorder, Part XX.l of the Criminal Code). I was then asked to draft an article to be published in the Canadian Criminal Law Review. My article explains and analyzes the provisions in Part XX.l Mental Disorder of the Criminal Code as it existed at that time, as well as the amendments that were proposed by Bill C-14.

Bill C-14 considerably changed the forensic system in Canada. The three main components of Bill C-14 were: (1) the creation of a new "high-risk accused" designation; (2) a new statutory definition of "significant threat to the safety of the public"; and (3) a heightening of victims' rights. I highlight in the article my concerns and issues raised by Bill C-14 by reviewing the forensic mental health system's history, case law, doctrine, recent mental health research and parliamentary debates.

I selected this article because it demonstrates my deep understanding of the mental health regime in Canada and reflects my strong writing skills resulting in the publication of this article. The publication was reviewed and approved by the Editorial Board of the Canadian Criminal Law Review.

2-Describe the five (5) most significant cases or matters that you dealt with while in legal practice or as a judge and how you dealt with them:

1) Royal Ottawa Health Care Group (Brockville Mental Health Centre) v. Ontario (Ministry of Labour), April 25, 2017, Knott J., unpublished decision

In August 2014, the Brockville Mental Health Centre (BMHC) accepted an out-of-province patient with a complex history of mental illness, which included a long history of unpredictable violence to others, including health care providers. The assaults began within days of her arrival at the BMHC. The final assault occurred on October 10, 2014. The BMHC was charged with five offences as per the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

This was an extremely complex and lengthy trial. The matter was heard between the months of May and December 2016. The Ashley Smith incident loomed heavily in the background of this matter. In order to be an effective advocate for my client, it required extensive organization and preparation for this trial. For example, I had to organize the disclosure of thousands of pages into an easily searchable format. As lead counsel for BMHC, I actively prepared our witnesses and prepared extensively for cross-examination of the Crown's witnesses. Given the lengthy trial and numerous adjournments, I implemented a note-taking system which allowed me to review the relevant material including exhibits when the trial resumed after an adjournment. The above-noted diligence and hard work resulted in a favourable result for BMHC.

2) Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario v. York Region District School Board, [2020] O.J. No. 2714 (Div. Ct.)

The Applicant union brought an Application for judicial review of the Arbitrator's decision to the Divisional Court. The latter decided the Principal's search of the Grievors' log regarding events in the workplace was not a breach of the Grievors' reasonable expectation of privacy. The Grievors' log was created and stored in their private Gmail accounts which were accessed on the Board’s computer. The issue focused on balancing the reasonable expectation of privacy of employees with the duty of the employer to manage the workplace.

Since this matter was an appeal, the parties provided transcripts and a series of documents from the arbitration hearing. In order to be an effective appellate judge, I reviewed all documents and made detailed notes in preparation for the hearing. After hearing the arguments from the parties, our panel met to discuss our views on the matter. At these meetings, it is important to know the subject matter by having read the material beforehand and listening to the arguments of the parties. Once it was determined that I would write the decision for the majority (there was a dissenting decision), I drafted the decision and worked collaboratively with the other judges to finalize our decision.

3) R. v. Awad, 2018 ONSC 4901; affd 2021 ONCA 285

Mr. Awad was charged with trafficking cocaine and possessing proceeds of crime. There was lengthy evidence provided by six Crown witnesses regarding the police surveillance evidence from an expert witness. In addition, there were many exhibits presented to the court by the Crown and defense counsel. As with all matters including this one, I took meticulous notes during the trial and created proper summaries of the daily hearings. A thorough credibility assessment had to be performed in this matter, as with all trials before the Superior Court of Justice.

My ability to take clear and concise notes as well as writing daily summaries provided the tools to assess credibility. This approach assisted me in writing my lengthy decision as I could retrieve applicable facts and testimony to clearly present them in my decision.

4) PhD program

I began my PhD in law at the University of Ottawa in September 2016 prior to my appointment to the judiciary in May 2017.I completed my course work during the 2016-2017 school year. I paused my PhD program after my judicial appointment in order to better assess my new responsibilities and workload.

Notwithstanding judicial workload, I returned to the PhD in law program in the year following my academic leave. I continued in the program by completing extensive research in Indigenous issues and the application of Gladue principles within the court system and within the Review Board system.

Most of this academic work was completed during my non-sit days and vacation time. I scheduled dedicated times to write decisions and time to complete my PhD program requirements. I used my organizational skills in order to manage my time appropriately. My professional priority always remained my position as a judge; however, I was able to complete my PhD written and oral examinations which assessed my knowledge of the directed readings. In the last year, I wrote and finalized my thesis and successfully defended my thesis in December 2021. My thesis has been nominated for two academic prizes.

This ability to focus and prioritize responsibilities allowed me to continue working on my PhD. Otherwise, it would have been difficult if not impossible to continue with my PhD. My work ethic has also allowed me to spend time with my family and community which is of utmost importance to me.

5) Tedford Macintosh v. Boyd, 2021 ONSC 7198

My trial decision in this matter related to issues of child support, child support arrears and parenting issues. These issues are at the heart of many family law disputes. One of the parties was a self-represented litigant and the other was represented by well-experienced counsel. Since there was a self-represented litigant in this matter, it was important for me as the trial judge to ensure the proper balance for both parties to have an opportunity to be equally heard.

During this trial, there was complex financial evidence provided and arguments of undue hardship. As with many other family law trials, this was an emotionally charged family law matter. However, as a judge, I demonstrated that I was able to put that aside and base my decision on the facts presented and the applicable law.

In addition, it is my view that as a judge who sits in family law hearings, I must provide a decision that is not only timely, but also well written, clear and concise. In family law disputes, this is very important since there is a direct impact on the lives of not only the parties but also on their children. They must be able to understand the reasons for the decision and the Order provided at the end of the decision as it relates to the issues argued at trial

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA EXPERIENCE

List all cases in which you participated as counsel which were heard by the Supreme Court of Canada (appeals as of right, references and appeals by leave) and the result (include any pending cases). You may include significant participation in a case other than as named counsel (e.g. factum review committee). If so, describe precisely the nature of your participation:

List all Supreme Court of Canada leave applications in which you participated as counsel and their outcome (include any pending cases):

Baber Javed Chaudry v. Her Majesty the Queen, et al. (Docket 37265)

Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (26-10-2016)

I successfully argued against granting the leave to appeal to the Appellant.

List all cases in which you participated as a judge which were heard by the Supreme Court of Canada (appeals as of right, references and appeals by leave) and the result (include any pending cases):

Callow v. Zollinger et al., 2017 ONSC 5992, aff d C.M. Callow Inc. v. Zollinger, 2020 SCC 45

On December 18, 2020, the Supreme Court allowed Callow's appeal, set aside the order of the Court of Appeal and reinstated my judgment.

List all cases in which you participated as a judge where leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada was requested or granted and their outcome (include any pending cases):

PART 10 – THE ROLE OF THE JUDICIARY IN CANADA’ S LEGAL SYSTEM

The Government of Canada seeks to appoint judges with a deep understanding of the judicial role in Canada. In order to provide a more complete basis for evaluation, candidates are asked to offer their insight into broader issues concerning the judiciary and Canada's legal system. For each of the following questions, please provide answers of between 750 and 1000 words.

1. What would you regard as your most significant contribution to the law and the pursuit of justice in Canada?

My most significant contribution to the law and pursuit of justice in Canada is my effort to assist all involved in the justice and mental health system with a particular emphasis on Indigenous Peoples. I strive for the judiciary to clarify the legal issues in order to have an inclusive and compassionate legal system for First Nations, Inuit and Métis.

I am a francophone Abenaki woman. I am also fluently bilingual in Canada’s official languages. I grew up in Hanmer, a small francophone town east of Sudbury, Ontario. As a First Nations woman growing up in Northern Ontario, I became aware of the need for dedicated individuals to provide a strong, representative voice on behalf of those who could not speak for themselves. As a child, it was my dream and desire to become a lawyer. Taking into account my upbringing, it became apparent to me as a lawyer that my next goal was to become a judge in order to share my life’s experience and to continue my public service. During this journey, I have remained rooted in my Odanak First Nation.

I have a unique background as a First Nations woman and as a specialist in mental health law. In my work at the Royal Ottawa Health Care Group (Royal) and during my PhD in law, I performed extensive research regarding Indigenous issues, Gladue principles, and their particular use in the forensic mental health system. These principles assist in achieving fairness for Indigenous accused before the criminal justice system.

When I started my employment as General Counsel with the Royal, I specialized in labour, employment, Indigenous, human rights, and privacy law. Soon after my arrival, I became aware and quickly recognized that there was a need for legal services in mental health matters before the Consent and Capacity (CCB) and Ontario Review Board (ORB). I argued cases before the CCB and the ORB, and appeals from those boards before the Superior Court of Justice and the Court of Appeal for Ontario. My legal arguments led to significant developments in the law governing mental health law matters, such as the ORB’s ability to award costs, restrictions to ORB conditions regarding access to the internet and the use of electroconvulsive therapy (Chaudry (Re), 2015 ONCA 317, 125 O.R. (3d) 641, leave to appeal refused, [2016] S.C.C.A. No. 460; Everingham (Re), 2014 ONCA 743, 122 O.R. (3d) 641; Dr. Ahmed v. Marlene Carter, 2014 ONSC, unpublished decision).

My deep understanding of mental health legal issues led to my creation of judicial resources such as a Mental Health Checklist and Resource Guide for Better Mental Health for the Superior Court of Justice of Ontario and the Ontario Court of Justice.

In the Superior Court of Ontario, I am considered an expert by my colleagues in Gladue principles and mental health law. Due to my expertise in Gladue principles, the Right Honourable Beverly McLachlin invited me as her first guest writer to draft a column regarding access to justice for Indigenous Peoples and Gladue reports in The Lawyer’s Daily. This column shares perspectives regarding access to justice.

My experience in mental health law led me to provide continuing legal education to health care and legal professionals, psychiatric facilities and the judiciary. For example, I have presented on such topics as Gladue principles at the Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice, the National Judicial Institute and the Canadian Bar Association’s conferences, etc., mental health in the workplace at the Environment and Climate Change Canada Executive Leadership Council, the role of the judiciary in mental health appeals at the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Superior Court Judges Association and provided legal updates at the Canadian Association of Psychiatry and the Law. A more thorough list of my presentations are listed above in this Questionnaire.

I have worked extensively to provide training to former clients, the Institut Philippe-Pinel in Montreal, the ORB, psychiatrists throughout Canada, health care workers and the judiciary regarding the application of the Gladue principles to Indigenous not criminally responsible/unfit to stand trial accused. As General Counsel at the Royal, I also created a team to provide appropriate training for social workers and other health care workers regarding how to properly draft useful Gladue reports. In addition, I spearheaded a partnership program between the Royal and Algonquin College to provide training opportunities at the Royal and mental health services to Indigenous students.

My goal is to continue to educate the judiciary and community stake holders regarding various Indigenous and mental health legal issues to ensure that the stigma and misunderstanding are limited and hopefully one day eliminated. Through these efforts, individuals appearing before judicial bodies will receive a fair process that recognizes their unique situation. As noted above, I have always participated in this type of education.

2. How has your experience provided you with insight into the variety and diversity of Canadians and their unique perspectives?

As an Abenaki woman, I have a deep appreciation of the realities of First Nation, Inuit and Métis Peoples. Growing up as a young First Nations person off reserve, my family experienced adversity. I had a memorable conversation with my father in approximately 1982 during which he asked me if other kids laughed at me because I was "native". I recall telling him that they laughed at my name, which was evidently much different from the others in our small predominantly French community. My father got a sad look in his eyes and told me that when he was a child, the kids in his school would laugh, point at him and say that he came from “that family”, le "sauvage" who lived on Sunnybrae Street. One teacher told him, “tu as un dernier nom pour coucher dehors” which was clearly insensitive and ignorant. The lack of respect shown to my father and our family affected me as I was growing up.

My childhood was not a privileged one. In addition to having a First Nations father, ours was a working-class household. It was expected that I would contribute in real, financial terms and that no work was not worthwhile. As such, I did whatever jobs were available to me - babysitting, retail and service. These early experiences taught me many things, such as the importance of hard work, but they also permitted me to see the need of others and learn how to see and appreciate the interests and importance of all.

When I moved to Ottawa to attend law school, my world as a First Nations woman changed. Many recognized my last name (which means "pathfinder" in the Abenaki language) as a well-known First Nations name. I am so grateful to my relatives who paved the way, such as renowned documentary film-maker Alanis OBomsawin. I joined the Aboriginal Law Students’ Association and my involvement in Indigenous issues grew and expanded. Once I started to practice law, I joined the Aboriginal Legal Services of the University of Ottawa Legal Aid Clinic as a File Reviewer and Caseworker. I also became a Board Member. I later taught "Les autochtones et le droit" for two semesters at the University of Ottawa, French Common Law Program.

I gained further insight into issues relating to Indigenous women and began attending and participating in events in my First Nation. Furthermore, through my work at the Royal Ottawa Health Care Group (Royal), I was responsible for the Indigenous Relationships Program. I continually met with various Indigenous groups and organizations, including institutions like Algonquin College to work collaboratively in the provision of mental health services to Indigenous students.

The colonial separation of my family from my First Nation limited my connection to my culture and language when I was a child. Over the years, I have returned to my community. I participate in ceremonies and am supported by elders and taking extensive courses in my Abenaki language. It is important for me to learn the language of my ancestors and to be able to speak it fluently. For me, my Abenaki language is also key to my cultural knowledge. My goal is to teach the language of my ancestors to my children.

I have also seen how different Indigenous perspectives can be from the colonial history of much of the Canadian population, while still recognizing and embracing all our unique perspectives which are the fabric of our country. Such experiences have also shown me that as much as all Canadians are unique, we all have common elements at the core of our perspectives. By seeing these commonalities, I recognize that these are the elements to focus on rather than any single different view or belief. As Canadians, we must stop focusing on our differences and embrace diversity in order to move our country forward in a progressive manner.

Although I grew up speaking a marginalized language in a predominantly Anglophone community, I have personally experienced how certain people can be inclusive while others can be exclusionary and insensitive towards my First Nations and francophone heritage. Even after living through such encounters, I still believe we, as a nation, are more inclusive and diverse today than ever. It is through such experiences that a person can gain further insight into the varied perspectives of all Canadians.

As a mother of two, I have some understanding of the challenges faced by our children and of parenting. I can relate to the concerns of other parents and approach family law files with patience, honesty, empathy and compassion. My children keep me humble and help provide me with a window into the lives of some or many young people in contemporary society.

My extensive experience in mental health law provides me with insight into a group of individuals that are part of Canada's diversity and variety. Through my work at the Royal, I worked daily with mental health issues by meeting with psychiatrists, patients and their family members and community groups. I was continually provided with various perspectives from individuals who either suffered from, or dealt with, mental illness. With the continuing efforts to increase Canadians' sensibilities to mental health issues and the destigmatization of mental illness, my experience has assisted me as a judge to review all cases with an open mind and sensitivity. It is crucial that our legal system recognize and support efforts to sensitize the general public regarding mental illness via their judicial behaviour and understanding as articulated in judgments.

I believe my experience as a francophone First Nations woman, a parent, a lawyer, a scholar and a judge provide me with the lived understanding and insight into Canada's diversity because I, and my life experience, are part of that diversity. My background is a clear example of the intersectional diversity that makes our country so special to me and my family. My experiences have taught me that while discrimination is an ongoing reality in Canada, my abilities allow me to contribute to our country and assist us to be a more inclusive society, not to mention one that is fair and just to all.

3. Describe the appropriate role of a judge in a constitutional democracy.

The role of a judge in a constitutional democracy requires them to always apply impartiality, act independently and with integrity, and remain cognizant of the pillars of the Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter). A judge must put aside their preconceived notions regarding all matters, groups or associations in order to ensure that they are objective throughout the process. They must be sensitive to the legal, factual and social context surrounding the matters before them. A judge must ensure that their decisions are always consistent with the rights enshrined in the Constitution and the Charter.

During their decision-making process, a judge must recognize that "[every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability" (Charter, s. 15). Equality is not treating everyone the same but treating everyone with fairness and equity taking their differences into account. In addition, s. 16 of the Charter mandates the official recognition of languages. According to law, every Canadian citizen has the right to be heard in either official language, French or English.

A judge must continuously interpret the Constitution as a living and breathing document that is reflective of the beliefs and aspirations of generations since its original implementation. The Constitution should not be used as an impediment to individual rights. It must be interpreted in a manner that addresses issues that were not foreseen when the Constitution was first drafted. However, the main objective of the Constitution is to treat people equally under the law and the only way a judge can do so is to always be aware, open-minded and to interpret it as an ever-evolving document for those it seeks to protect as well as those who seek it for protection.

A judge must demonstrate great skills to achieve the delicate balance between the needs of the public and the rights of the individual. This is not always an easy task and it must be accomplished by a knowledgeable, independent, open and impartial judge. Consequently, a judge must remain independent from influence or pressure. They must not engage in public discussions regarding current cases that are before them and refrain from commenting on political issues.

A recurring and oft heard criticism of the judiciary is that judges are out of touch. In an ever-changing climate, a judge must adapt to respond to these changes. A judge must keep abreast of changes in their country. Knowledge and flexibility will ensure that they successfully hear and weigh the evidence in order to make a final determination on a matter. In addition, the precedential value of caselaw is a bedrock of our democratic court system. Precedents are a prominent feature of legal reasoning and through clear and concise precedents, our constitutional democracy is guided by the Supreme Court of Canada that affords a fair protection for all.

A particularly important role of a judge in a constitutional democracy is to be mindful that their decisions can assist in protecting vulnerable populations, those that cannot speak for themselves and are often exploited.

Furthermore, a judge must remain politically neutral. This is especially important for the Supreme Court of Canada where federal as well as provincial and territorial legislation and government initiatives are examined and interpreted. There is a fine balance between constitutional and legislative powers.

This balance is even harder to maintain given the rapid evolution of technology that provides a voice to a larger number groups and/or individuals. Social media allows everyone to voice their views regardless of whether certain views are inappropriate or insensitive. Accordingly, a judge must face this new reality and assure that the loudest voice is not the voice that carries the day in court. A constitutional democracy will face threats, not only from within its borders, but also from abroad which is further facilitated with social media. Beliefs in other areas of the world should not influence or affect how our Constitution is interpreted and applied to all Canadians, absent the pressure of external forces. Our Constitution is only as strong as those who defend it and assure its application to all.

In my view, the role of a judge in a constitutional democracy is pivotal, wide ranging and should be responsive to change. It is crucial that providing access to justice occurs in a politically neutral fashion and unbiased by all external influences.

Nevertheless, Canada should not be isolated from an ever-rapid evolution of technology and social values and must strive to be a beacon for others as to how a constitutional democracy should be protected and fairly applied to all.

4. Who is the audience for Supreme Court of Canada decisions?

The audience for the decisions rendered by the Supreme Court of Canada is varied and wide. Moreover, the Court must want its audience to be so and strive to expand its reach. The legitimacy of the Supreme Court of Canada depends on its decisions being understood and read by the widest possible audience.

The primary audience for the Court's decisions is the parties to particular litigation, who are attending court with varying legal issues, concerns, fears and stories. Although the Supreme Court of Canada is not the first court to hear the story of the different litigants, it is the final one.

In addition to the parties, interested individuals, governments and groups may seek intervenor status. Intervenors must prove that they will present arguments that will be useful to the Supreme Court of Canada and are not presented by the parties to the matter. Unlike amicus, they bring to the forefront how a matter before the Supreme Court of Canada may affect others, and they therefore represent a view of the public. Intervenors are also an audience for Supreme Court of Canada decisions.

Another audience includes lower courts, the legal profession, legislatures, academics, media and the public. The Supreme Court of Canada's role is not to act as a legislator but rather interpret statutory laws and guide the legislators through the decision-making process when they may need to modify or amend laws reflective of the legal issues raised before the Court on the appeal. Therefore, the provincial, territorial and federal legislators are frequently a key audience for the decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada.

Another key audience of the Supreme Court of Canada decisions are litigants in highly litigious fields. Decisions from the Supreme Court of Canada guide litigants through the legal system. This guidance must assure litigants proceed with legal claims well founded in fact and the law. All litigants have a right to be heard; however, a right to be heard is not an absolute right if the caselaw is clear that a certain claim is not well founded in fact and law. By guiding litigants, the Supreme Court of Canada's decisions can impact the number of matters heard by the courts across the country. By doing so, this can provide a vital balance to access to justice, without overloading our court systems or otherwise acting contrary to the public interest.

Although part of the public, the media is another audience for Supreme Court of Canada decisions. The media's reporting on these decisions can have an impact on how decisions are perceived by the public. Accordingly, the media is a clear audience of Supreme Court of Canada decisions.

An additional audience for Supreme Court of Canada decisions are other jurisdictions. Although a small audience, this is nevertheless an audience as other jurisdictions may consider Supreme Court of Canada decisions for guidance on a similar issue in their jurisdictions. With greater access to information through technology, other jurisdictions may consider at a greater frequency Supreme Court of Canada decisions. Such an audience provides the Supreme Court of Canada an indirect impact of Canadian and Charter values and Indigenous law on other jurisdictions, particularly for those addressing similar issues or First Nations issues.

Finally, future generations are also audience members to decisions rendered by the Supreme Court of Canada. While following the principle of stare decisis provides predictability and consistency, the Supreme Court of Canada must work to move society forward in a progressive way yet remain respectful of the law. Future generations are part of the audience as current decisions will have an impact upon them. This approach helps guarantee a society that continues to be respectful of the law and reflective of ever-emerging awareness of inclusiveness that continues to move our Canadian society to evolve to the betterment of our citizens and our nations.

To maintain all of these audiences, the Supreme Court of Canada must continually have them in mind. A structured analysis and critical thinking must be demonstrated in its judgments. The reasons must be concise and demonstrate a careful consideration of the law that is dearly communicated for all to understand. The decision must be objective and based on a careful review of the facts and the legal arguments with the subsequent application of the legislation and caselaw. The audience must be able to understand the analytical process behind the Supreme Court of Canada's decision-making.

The Supreme Court of Canada must also write in clear, plain, concise and understandable language so that all its audiences can understand. It is important to note that the Supreme Court of Canada is an authoritative interpreter of provincial, territorial and federal legislation, caselaw and emerging recognition of Indigenous and treaty rights. The Supreme Court of Canada must be mindful that the audience can be highly educated, partially educated and/or uneducated. Clarity is the key to appropriate decision writing, which must be sound arid supported by good reasoning. Consequently, the Supreme Court of Canada must speak to a wide audience from the general public to the legal scholar.

5. To what extent does the role of a Supreme Court of Canada Justice allow for the reconciliation of the need to provide guidance on legal questions of importance to the legal system as a whole with the specific facts of a case which might appear to lead to an unjust result for a party?

The Supreme Court of Canada has a profound impact on Canadian law and Canadians. The Supreme Court Act created the Court and guides it. Subsection 40(1) of the Act provides that the Supreme Court of Canada can hear an appeal when it “is of the opinion that any question involved therein is, by reason of its public importance or the importance of any issue of law or any issue of mixed law and fact involved in that question, one that ought to be decided by the Supreme Court or is, for any other reason, of such a nature or significance as to warrant decision by it, and leave to appeal from that judgment is accordingly granted by the Supreme Court.” Therefore, the Supreme Court of Canada’s decisions must clarify legal questions, set precedents and, at times, shape public policy based on the laws of the country. As such, the Supreme Court of Canada must provide a balance between guidance and dealing with the specific facts and circumstances of a case. This balance must also include equality and address inequality for all before the laws of Canada.

A Supreme Court of Canada Justice has an essential role to play in helping the Court achieve that balance. They must be capable of firm decision-making and have a clear understanding of the laws, but also how the rule of law may be affected by the competing visions and interests argued before the Court. It is essential that the Supreme Court of Canada Justice be aware of how the language used in drafting their judgment may be perceived by the parties. The Supreme Court of Canada has a mandate to issue decisions that are clear and concise for the parties before it, as well as for the legal system.

A Supreme Court of Canada Justice must have an overall impartial view when examining a specific case in front of them. It is important to remember that they are neither a trial judge nor a provincial, federal or a territorial appellate judge. A Supreme Court of Canada Justice comes with a variety of experiences and expertise that necessarily informs without interfering with their responsibility to be impartial and independent. This is key to all judicial positions but more particularly to the Supreme Court of Canada.

A Supreme Court of Canada Justice is impartial and independent, a key to all judicial positions. Therefore, they do not react strategically to external political pressures. This maintains the legitimacy of the Supreme Court of Canada’s standing and its decisions. To do otherwise would be contradictory to the spirit and objective of the Supreme Court of Canada.

Charter values, such as substantive equality, dignity, fairness and human rights, are beacons for a Supreme Court of Canada Justice’s reasoning. Respecting these values support the public interest in ensuring all Canadians are treated fairly and equally for all rights protected and shared by all. They ensure national equality before the law, which is a core value of our judicial system.

Facts and legal issues raised by the parties and intervenors before the Supreme Court of Canada will always be specific to litigants and will not necessarily have equality at heart. Nevertheless, this is the balance the Supreme Court of Canada must always consider, namely, substantive equality and fairness for all versus a specific interest favouring a few. Our court system, including the Supreme Court of Canada, will always have a party dissatisfied with the result. Simply because a result may seem unjust to an unsuccessful party does not mean their perception is correct. After all, it is vital to recognize that the Supreme Court of Canada is not a court of popular opinion and should never become one.

At the core of the Supreme Court of Canada is a balance between providing guidance and interpreting competing interests. Without this balance, our judicial system risks not reflecting Canadian values of equality, dignity, fairness and human rights, ail of which are admired by other countries. While a Supreme Court of Canada Justice may appreciate and understand the plight of one of the parties before the Court, this cannot influence or form the basis for their decision-making process. Each member of the Supreme Court of Canada has a duty to remind others of this balance, as no single member of the Supreme Court of Canada has this sole responsibility; it is rather a collective duty. This shared duty will further ensure the proper guidance is provided, notwithstanding a perceived unjust result which, when properly viewed, is not necessarily an unjust result, but rather the just resolution for the parties and society.