[20] May 2009 [E Fea] Jud Icial Review 2009
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

[20] May 2009 [E Fea] Jud Icial Review 2009

on

  • 452 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
452
Views on SlideShare
452
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

[20] May 2009 [E Fea] Jud Icial Review 2009 Document Transcript

  • 1. FEATURE COVER PREAMBLE – UPDATE ON JUDICIAL REVIEW SPRING 2009 A LOOK AT ONE STUDENT’S DISCIPLINARY CHALLENGES AND EXTENT SHE OVERCAME OBSTALCES OF A SYSTEMIC NATURE THROUGH LAW. They were separated at the whim of a backlash by campus security at the time of the then president of York who stepped down from office in May 2008 six months after rosemary filed her application for judicial review in November 2008. Several years later this spring 2009 she is unlike her colleague Daniel Freeman met even more so one Canada’s leading self-represented litigants within the Ontario court system. Amongst the few great cases she brings meaning to the more relevant case law specializing in hospital-police matters specific to mental health law in the areas of administrative and constitutional law. The focus of her articles of internship entitled trillium is mental health in its various facets of the law. In the pages that follow; we profile Rosemary because she is amongst the few whom were sanctioned by York during the presidency of the then President Mars den until May 2008. This feature article commemorates the theme of anniversary since York presides on its 50th anniversary since the relevant case law proves itself meaningless because there are countless cases. IF ALL GOOD THINGS COME TO AN END IF ALL GOOD THINGS COME TO AN END—THEN BE AS IT MAY her high profile judicial review, encompassing a broader dynamic of civil, constitutional human rights cases – and her championing of social justice issues in the courts – you’d be justified in concluding she intended to pursue newer challenges in life, when she embarked on TRILLIUM, than pursue a meaningful career in law. And so, why does York still mean something to this not-so bright-eyed beautiful potentially famous star?
  • 2. Rosemary (U Of T ’95-99, ’02) says a meaningful career in law meant nothing to her at that time because she was an under-represented member of a community whose origins were Western-European decent, and whose family embarked on meaningful life changes when they arrived at east coast Canada to become landed-pioneers (NS 1951 QC 1952 ON 1952) through Quebec QC to Toronto to start off on a new meaningful career in estates matters. In her early years, Rosemary (SJCS ’90-95) says, “I didn’t want to become a journalist, particularly and even more so her family insisted that she pursue a meaningful career in teaching, but she insisted that amongst the professions; she was interested in social justice, more so then “the other professions”. Many of her guidance counselors and academic mentors encouraged her to pursue teaching whereas her mother wished to see her become a journalist and all the while none of this meant anything to her and so she applied herself to pursue law. DeCaires (U Of T ’99) says a meaningful career in law was not so important as pursuing relevant internships, and all the while it took effortless pains to pursue post-graduate study while avoiding graduate school altogether because she could not settle the question about a meaningful career as a teacher, journalist or in the field of law. Rosemary, DeCaires (U Of T ’02) applied herself fully in all-academic realms of life; and most of all during her non-academic and extra-curricular realms of academic life. Following her devote post-graduate study phase at U Of T, she was next to never seen at school although she applied herself as fully as possible; within less than one year, she was trespassed, banned and eventually expelled from school for life in 2004/2005. Now, did this really mean something to her? Of course; less than one year later in November 2006, 2007, she filed an application for judicial review while she appealed for public support of interest in her cause towards social justice. IF ALLS WELL ENDS WELL Rosemary’s (York ‘04) visit in 2004/2005 was just a journey that truly meant something to her at that time. It meant something to her because she was fascinated by the media, and could not help herself from publicity and most of all focused her energies on becoming the centre of attention. Since she embarked on her new leash in 2003/2004, she joined the many countless student associations comprising of York. She was considered a valued student in her first year thus brining her a few great bursaries for her commitment to excellence. And all the while nobody knew that the next year she would be formally accepted and finally expelled from professional study because paying such a high tariff to attend law school meant nothing to her sort of speak. Now 52 months later she is prepared to take all risks in her countless battles. In fact; she’s prepared to undertake this risk because she is a true believer that all good things come to an end. She has now served her four years of suspension prepared to go back elsewhere taking all risks to resume school. JUDICIAL REVIEW Rosemary (York ’08) will most definitely miss her year of call for the next few years at least until the question of her expulsion is settled. What remains unsettled is not her disciplinary sentence – because she never had one – but all those high school grades she received in post-graduate study for addressing the more famous 18th century Jean-Jacques Rousseau ‘bold exploits’ and ‘feats of courage’ in political theory and Flora Tristan’s legal “post-revolutionary ideas” in History and most of all Foucault’s “discipline and punish” in Sociology and the law. All of this still means something to her, which brings us to the then president before the Supreme Court of Canada in 2006. FORECAST 2
  • 3. Rosemary, whose graduate study career at York, paralleled the life of her colleague – whose more relevant case against the then President – is relevant to her case involving York for expelling her from school without a disciplinary hearing for an endless period beyond life. Unlike her renown colleague who was reinstated in September 2006; she brings plenty of issues to the York table such as disability and the law and social justice for human rights activities. Unlike the relevant case law in the more recent years; a judicial review at this meaningful phase of her career still means something to her. For details about her more recent articles of internship entitled TRILLIUM 2009 visit her online. 3