[1] Alan Borovoy, “Guardianship and Civil Liberties” (1982) 3 Health L. Can. 51-57.

[2] ARCH has written several law reform and policy papers on the topic of legal capacity, including: “Addressing the Capacity of Parties before Ontario’s Administrative Tribunals: Promoting Autonomy and Preserving Fairness” (2009); “Addressing the Capacity of Parties before Ontario’s Administrative Tribunals: A Practical Guide for Ontario Lawyers” (2009); “Embracing Supported Decision-Making: Foundations for a New Beginning” (2009). These papers can be accessed on ARCH’s website: www.archdisabilitylaw.ca.

[3] UN enable, Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, online: http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?navid=14&pid=150 (last accessed: 14 November 2013).

[4] CCD-CACL Working Paper, UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: Making Domestic Implementation Real and Meaningful (February 2011), online: http://www.ccdonline.ca/en/international/un/canada/making-domestic-implementation-real-and-meaningful-feb2011 (last accessed: 1 October 2013).

[5] Anna MacQuarrie, Making the Convention Real and Meaningful for people with intellectual disabilities and their families, online: http://www.ccdonline.ca/en/socialpolicy/poverty-citizenship/legal-protections/the-un-CRPD-making-the-convention-real (last accessed: 14 November 2013).

[6] Dulcie McCallum, “Up the Basics: the Right to Decide” in Council of Canadians with Disabilities, Celebrating our Accomplishments: A voice of our own, (Winnipeg, 2011) 145, 149.

[7] Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 13 December 2006, 2515 UNTS 3 art 12.

[8] Amita Dhanda, “Legal Capacity in the Disability Rights Convention: Stranglehold of the Past or Lodestar for the Future” (2006-7) Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce 34.

[9] Robert D. Dinerstein, “Implementing Legal Capacity Under Article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: The Difficult Road From Guardianship to Supported Decision-Making” (2012) Human Rights Brief 19, No. 2, 8.

[10] Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Background conference document: Legal Capacity, 20-21, online: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/rights/ahc6documents.htm (last accessed: 14 November 2013).

[11] People with Disability Australia, Accommodating Human Rights: A Human Perspective on Housing, and Housing and Support, For Persons with Disabilities, (2010), 21, online: http://www.pwd.org.au/documents/pubs/AccommodatingHumanRights2003.pdf (last accessed: 18 November 2013).

[12] Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Monitoring the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: Guidance for Human Rights Monitors, Professional training series No. 17, (New York and Geneva, 2010), online: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/Disabilities_training_17EN.pdf (last accessed: 8 November 2013).

[13] Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, note 7, Preamble (n).

[14] Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, note 7, Article 3.

[15] Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, note 7, Article 16.

[16] Law Commission of Ontario, A Framework for the Law as It Affects Persons with Disabilities (Toronto: September 2012) 100.

[17] Law Commission of Ontario, note 16, 101.

[18] Law Commission of Ontario, note 16, 71.

[19] Law Commission of Ontario, note 16, 77.

[20] Law Commission of Ontario, note 16, 101.

[21] Law Commission of Ontario, note 16, 119-121.

[22] Substitute Decisions Act, 1992, S.O. 1992, c. 30 [SDA].

[23] O. Reg. 460/05.

[24] O. Reg. 100/96.

[25] O. Reg. 26/95.

[26] Law Commission of Ontario, Roles and Responsibilities of Adults, Legal Representatives and Third Parties (RDSP project), 2, (unpublished paper, 2013).

[27] Law Society of Upper Canada, Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 2.02(6); Ed Montigny, Notes on Capacity to Instruct Counsel (15 February 2011) online: http://www.archdisabilitylaw.ca/?q=notes-capacity-instruct-counsel-0 (last accessed: 20 December 2013).

[28] See Banton v. Banton, [1998] O.J. 3528 (ON Gen Div.).

[29] D’Arcy Hiltz and Anita Szigeti, A Guide to Consent and Capacity Law in Ontario (LexisNexis, 2012) 24-25 (Hiltz and Szigeti).

[30] Hiltz and Szigeti, note 29, 25.

[31] SDA, note 22, s. 45.

[32] SDA, note 22, s. 15.

[33] SDA, note 22, s. 16(3) to 16(5).

[34] Also see related provisions in the Substitute Decisions Act: SDA, note 22, ss. 81 and 81.

[35] SDA, note 22, s. 16(2).

[36] If the PGT is of the opinion that the person is truly at risk of harm it can apply to the Superior Court, pursuant to s. 79(1) of the Substitute Decisions Act for an order compelling the person to submit to an assessment of his/her capacity; see SDA, note 22, s. 79(1); also see Regulation 460/05,Capacity Assessment, s. 3(1).

[37] SDA, note 22, s. 79(1).

[38] See SDA, note 22, ss. 79, 80, 81 and 82, 83 to 87.

[39] SDA, note 22, s. 79(1).

[40] SDA, note 22, s. 81(3).

[41] SDA, note 22, s. 83 (1).

[42] See Urbisci v. Urbisci, [2010] O.J. No. 4740; also Zheng v. Zheng, [2012] O.J. No 2957.

[43] Abrams v. Abrams, [2008] O.J. No. 5207 (Ont. S.C.J.).

[44] SDA, note 22, s. 16(5); it is worth noting that under the original version of the SDA, s. 16(1) to (7), upon an assessment being performed and a person being found incapable, an advocate was to meet with the person and explain that the person had the right to refuse the statutory guardianship of the PGT. Only once the person agreed to accept the guardianship of the PGT did the PGT become that person’s guardian of property.

[45] SDA, note 22, s. 16(6).

[46] SDA, note 22, s. 20.2(1)(a), 20.2(1)(b) and 20.2(3).

[47] SDA, note 22, s. 20.1(1).

[48] For example see SDA, note 22, ss. 24(2.1) & 57(2.2).

[49] E-mail interview (#1) of Dermot Moore (Litigation and Senior Client Counsel, Office of the Public Guardian and Trustee) (29 November 2013) (Moore Interview #1).

[50] O Reg. 99/96.

[51] SDA, note 22, s. 16.1(1).

[52] SDA, note 22, s. 17(1).

[53] SDA, note 22, s. 20.1.

[54] See Council of Canadians with Disabilities, “Federal Poverty Reduction Plan Must Address Disability Poverty”, Press Release, (18 November 2010), online: http://www.ccdonline.ca/en/socialpolicy/poverty/media-release-federal-poverty-reduction-plan-18nov2010 (last accessed: 23 December 2013).

[55] Moore Interview #1, note 49.

[56] Pursuant to the SDA, note 22, s. 18, the PGT must provide written reasons for a rejection of an application. If the applicant disputes the denial, the PGT must apply to the court to decide the matter.

[57] SDA, note 22, s. 19

[58] see Dermot Moore, “Recent Decisions in Guardianship Law” presented at Grave Consequences: Traps and Pitfalls in Contemporary Estates Law, Ontario Bar Association, Institute of Continuing Education (2010) 3; also see Farley v. Farley, [2008] O.J. No. 3228 (Ont. S.C.J.).

[59] SDA, note 22, ss. 72, 74, 77.

[60] SDA, note 22, s. 22(3).

[61] Gray v. Ontario [2006] O.J. No. 266, para 47.

[62] Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, note 7, Article 12.

[63] SDA, note 22, s. 25(2).

[64] Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, note 7, Article 12.

[65] SDA, note 22, s. 26.

[66] SDA, note 22, ss. 69, 71, 73 & 75.

[67] SDA, note 22, s. 69. (2) & 73(1).

[68] SDA, note 22, s. 32(1).

[69] C.D. Freedman, “Misfeasance, Non Feasance and the Self-Interested Attorney,” (2010) 48 Osgoode Hall Law Journal 457-498, 458.. (Note although the article focuses on attorneys for property, the article treats attorneys and guardians as similar – see 462).

[70] SDA, note 22, s. 32(7) and 32(8).

[71] SDA, note 22, s. 32(2).

[72] SDA, note 22, s. 32(3).

[73] SDA, note 22, s. 32(10).

[74] SDA, note 22, s. 37.

[75] SDA, note 22, s. 32(6).

[76] O. Reg. 100/96 Accounts and Records of Attorneys and Guardians, s. 5.

[77] SDA, note 22, (original version prior to amendments of 1996), s. 41(1). In 1996 there was a major legislative overhaul of the substitute decision-making regime in Ontario. This included the repeal of the Advocacy Act, note 106, and amendments to the Substitute Decisions Act to remove any references to the Advocacy Act and to make other changes. See note 113 for the amending statute.

[78] SDA, note 22, s. 20.1(1).

[79] See Luke Reid, “The CRPD and the SDA: Research Paper” (unpublished paper prepared for Ian Scott Scholarship, 2012), 84.

[80] Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, note 7, Article 12.

[81] SDA, note 22, S. 57(2.2).

[82] For example, the PGT reported acting as court ordered guardian of the person for 31 individuals in 2008-09 and 24 individuals in 2009-10. See Office of the Public Guardian and Trustee, Annual Report, 2008-09, “Message from the Public Guardian and Trustee” (2009) 4; online: http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/family/pgt/2008report/MsgFromPGT.pdf (last accessed: 3 January 2014) (PGT Annual Report, 2008-09); and Office of the Public Guardian and Trustee, Annual Report, 2009-10, “Message from the Public Guardian and Trustee,” (2010) 2 , online: http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/family/pgt/2009report/MsgFromPGT.pdf (last accessed: 3 Jan  2014) (PGT Annual Report 2009-10).

[83] SDA, note 22, s. 69(1), 69(3).

[84] SDA, note 22, s. 55(2).

[85] SDA, note 22, ss. 58(1), 58(2), 58(3) and 59(1), 59(2).

[86] See Doug Surtees, “How Goes the Battle?: An Exploration of Guardianship Reform,” (2012) 50:1 Alberta Law Review 115-27, para. 18 for a discussion of the experience in Alberta (Surtees).

[87] For an example from another jurisdiction see Surtees, note 86.

[88] SDA, note 22, s. 59(2).

[89] SDA, note 22, s. 66(11).

[90] SDA, note 22, s. 66(10)(a).

[91] SDA, note 22, s. 66(2).

[92] SDA, note 22, s. 66(2.1).

[93] SDA, note 22, s. 66(4.1).

[94] SDA, note 22, s. 66(15).

[95] SDA, note 22, s. 66(8).

[96] SDA, note 22, s. 66(5).

[97] SDA, note 22, s. 68.

[98] SDA, note 22, s. 68(3).

[99] Moore Interview #1, note 49.

[100] Moore Interview #1, note 49.

[101] SDA, note 22, s. 88.

[102] SDA, note 22, ss. 27 & 62.

[103] E-mail interview (#2) of Dermot Moore (Litigation and Senior Client Counsel, Office of the Public Guardian and Trustee) (27 December 2013).

[104] SDA, note 22, ss. 39(1) & 68(1).

[105] SDA, note 22 (original version prior to amendments of 1996), s. 39(2).

[106] Advocacy Act, 1992, S.O. 1992, c. 26, s. 1 (Advocacy Act).

[107] Advocacy Act, note 106, s. 2 “Definitions”.

[108] Advocacy Act, note 106, s. 1.

[109] Advocacy Act, note 106, s. 19(2), 19(3).

[110] Advocacy Act, note 106, ss. 20(1) to 30(6).

[111] For example see SDA, note 22, (original version prior to the amendments of 1996), ss. 25(5), 62(5), 76(1).

[112] SDA, note 22 (original version prior to amendments of 1996), s. 76(4).

[113] See 36:1 Bill 19 Advocacy, Consent and Substitute Decisions Statute Law Amendment Act, 1995.

[114] Ombudsman Act, R.S.O. 1990, CO. 6 (Ombudsman Act).

[115] Ombudsman Act, note 114, ss. 14(1), 14(2), 17(1).

[116] Ontario Ombudsman, online: http://www.ombudsman.on.ca/investigations/selected-cases/2012/ Unaccounted-for (last accessed: 12 December 2013).

[117] Ontario Ombudsman, online: http://www.ombudsman.on.ca/investigations/selected-cases/2013/Discreditable-conduct (last accessed: 12 December 2013).

[118] Ombudsman Act, note 114, s. 14(1) and definitions, “governmental organization”. The Ombudsman is empowered to investigate decisions or acts of a government organization. Government organization is defined in the act as a ministry, commission, board or administrative unit of the government of Ontario.

[119] Ombudsman Act, note 114, s. 14(1), 14(2), 14(2,2), 17(1).

[120] See Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-