here. - Koskie Minsky LLP

4 3369 1094 Regarding CR001673
(marked Exhibit “HH”),
to advise as to what was
done, if anything, in
response to the
recommendation referred
to on page 8 re:
mandatory reporting in
facilities and government.
Duty of Care –Resident Abuse
5 1841 653 Advise what facts and
legal position will be
relied upon for paragraph
70 of the Statement of
Defence (marked as
Exhibit “B”).
As noted in CR001667 and CR001670,
MCSS already had in place mandatory
reporting by staff in Developmental
Services programs in both facilities and
the community. There were clear
standard, brief plain language protocols
and procedures to deal with abuse and
neglect in facilities (CR049133 and
CR049145) and standards for reporting in
the community as well (CR049218 and
CR109221). The interministerial
committee ensured information was
shared across Ministries and each
Ministry then developed, revised or
confirmed their own reporting procedures.
As admitted by plaintiff’s counsel at
qq.1838-1840, the plaintiffs have chosen
to frame their claim as one based on
systemic negligence claim, not individual
acts of abuse. As such, they have not put
the Crown's vicarious liability in relation
to each alleged discrete incident of abuse
into issue. As the plaintiffs have limited
their claim to systemic negligence, the
inquiry into alleged Crown liability is also
so limited.
Not responsive.
Answer states
what was in
place, not what
was done, if
anything, in
response to this
recommendation.
Document
CR109221 not
provided.
Unresponsive. No
facts have been
provided to
support paragraph
70 of the
Statement of
Defence.