L.B. v Toronto District School Board et al., 2017 ONSC 2301
The parents wont their case and discrimination was found. They also had their private school costs paid for the first year when they felt they were forced to remove him due to him not getting his accommodations.
From the case:
[5] Prior to this time, L.B. had been diagnosed with multiple disabilities including attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (“ADHD”), learning disabilities, and mental health disabilities that “primarily manifest themselves as anxiety and depression.”
[11] An IEP for the Grade 9 year was prepared for L.B. in October 2012. This IEP contained no reference to any previous or current attendance issues or any specific transition plans or needs. The IEP reflected some, but not all, of the recommendations contained in the exit IEP prepared by L.B.’s elementary school. Some of the supports identified in the Grade 9 IEP (for example, support from an educational assistant) do not seem to have been implemented. Some other supports were initiated, but failed. None of the staff involved with L.B. at this time had read Dr. Allan’s assessments or made contact with him to discuss L.B.’s educational or accommodation needs. Although in the first term of L.B.’s Grade 9 year, his vice principal initiated the process for referring L.B. for TDSB support services, L.B. was in fact never seen by a TDSB social worker, guidance counsellor or psychologist during his Grade 9 year.
[18] It was this adverse treatment that led to S.B.’s decision to remove him from the collegiate and send him to another school. The Tribunal acknowledged that, because of this discrimination, S.B. felt that she had no option but to remove L.B. from the public school system and enroll him in his current private residential school.
[19] Because of this discrimination, the Tribunal awarded general damages of $35,000.
[49] However, faced with the dilemma that she had in March-April 2013, it was a natural consequence of the breach of the Code that S.B. would take whatever steps were necessary to salvage that school year for her child. There was no indication that accommodation services would be forthcoming from the TDSB during the balance of that school year. The expectation was that the accommodation services would commence with the start of the following school year (when L.B. would begin Grade 10).
[57] The application for judicial review is therefore granted to the extent that L.B. is entitled to special damages in respect of the Grade 9 year; and the assessment thereof is remitted to the Tribunal for determination.