2025 FC 1132 - Judgment and Reasons

Sep 21, 2026

Upload by Marry

Judgment and reasons in Patrick Cully’s judicial review seeking reconsideration of a decision by Indigenous Services Canada that denied Jordan’s Principle funding for full-time Applied Behavioural Analysis therapy for his daughter Scarlet. The court finds the Appeal Decision unreasonable due to legal constraints governing discretion in applying Jordan’s Principle, sets it aside, and orders remittal for reconsideration by the External Expert Review Committee under specified timelines.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryHealthcare

FormatPDF

Pages30

Reading Time1 h 16 min

AccessFree to download

Overview

Background

Merits and Order

Date: 20250623 Docket: T-1255-25 Citation: 2025 FC 1132 Ottawa, Ontario, June 23, 2025 PRESENT: The Honourable Madam Justice Conroy BETWEEN: PATRICK CULLY Applicant And ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent JUDGMENT AND REASONS I. Overview [1] The Applicant, Mr. Patrick Cully, seeks judicial review of a decision made by a Senior Assistant Deputy Minister at Indigenous Services Canada [ISC] on May 15, 2025 [Appeal Decision]. The Appeal Decision upheld, in-part, an initial ISC decision which denied the Applicant’s application for Jordan’s Principle funding. [2] The Jordan’s Principle application sought funding for full-time Applied Behavioural Analysis [ABA] therapy for a year for the Applicant’s daughter, Scarlet, who was diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. [3] Time was of the essence in the hearing and determination of this judicial review. The filing deadlines and hearing were expedited by Case Management Judge Molgat, and I heard the merits ofthe judicial review on June 16, 2025. [4] The Applicant submits that the Appeal Decision is unreasonable and that it was determined through a flawed and unfair procedure. [5] I conclude that the Appeal Decision is unreasonable. It is untenable given the legal constraints that bear upon the exercise of ISC’s discretion when interpreting and applying Jordan’s Principle. [6] The Appeal Decision is set aside and shall be remitted to the Appeals Secretariat for reconsideration in accordance with the Court’s reasons and the Applicant’s further submissions. Given the importance of a timely decision for the Applicant, the matter is remitted on the following terms: a) The Applicant shall file, on or before July 4, 2025, any additional evidence and further submissions with the Appeal Secretariat for reconsideration by the External Expert Review Committee [EERC]; and b) ISC shall communicate its redetermination decision to the Applicant on or before July 18, 2025. [7] The parties are at liberty to amend the above timelines by agreement, with no requirement to seek an amended Order from the Court. II. Background [8] Scarlet just celebrated her fifth birthday. She is a member of Batchewana First Nation and is eligible to be registered for status under the Indian Act, RSC 1985, c I-5 [Indian Act] . She lives off-reserve in Thunder Bay, Ontario with her parents. Her mother is also a member of the First Nation and is a registered status Indian under the Indian Act. [9] In April 2023, just before her third birthday, Scarlet was formally assessed by a clinical psychologist, Dr. Christopher Mushquash. He diagnosed her with autism spectrum disorder (Level 2) with language impairment. Amongst other supports, he recommended that she participate in full-time ABA therapy until she is ready to attend school. A year later, in April 2024, Dr. Mushquash confirmed his recommendations for Scarlet. [10] Scarlet struggles with verbal and non-verbal communication, resulting in difficulties in identifying and meeting her needs. Prior to receiving supports, her communications skills were limited to the use of gesture, echolalia and repetition of words. She used a device that allowed her to communicate her needs non-verbally. She had frequent meltdowns and temper tantrums, sometimes as many as three a day. She struggled with transitions between activities, during changes in her routine, and in unfamiliar or uncomfortable settings. Ultimately, she was highly dependent on her parent’s assistance with all daily activities. [11] In July 2023, ISC approved Jordan’s Principle funding in the amount of $190,300 for autism therapies and supports for Scarlet. This included funding for her to receive part-time ABA therapy at Ignite Behavioural Consulting Inc. [Ignite] from the spring of 2024 to September 2024. In addition to the part-time ABA therapy, Scarlet attended the part time “entry to school” program, facilitated by the Ontario Autism Program [OAP], for six months s

FAQs

What was Patrick Cully seeking in this case?

He sought judicial review of an Appeal Decision upholding, in part, an Indigenous Services Canada decision that denied Jordan’s Principle funding for full-time ABA therapy for his daughter.

Why did the court set aside the Appeal Decision?

The court concluded the Appeal Decision was unreasonable because it was untenable given the legal constraints on how Indigenous Services Canada must interpret and apply Jordan’s Principle discretion.

What happens after the court’s order?

The matter is remitted to the Appeals Secretariat for reconsideration by the External Expert Review Committee, with deadlines for additional evidence and further submissions and for Indigenous Services Canada to communicate its redetermination.

Sep 21, 2026

Upload by Marry