Mercedes was successful before the Court of Appeal for Ontario in a precedent setting constitutional challenge to Ontario’s Mental Health Act.  Mercedes represented a deaf man who had been detained at the maximum secure unit of the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care for almost two decades. In the case of PS, a five-judge panel […]

Read More…


Mercedes successfully represented the appellant before the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board in an appeal of a CPSO decision.  The CPSO had determined that the physicians had not breached the standard of care in unilaterally placing a “Do Not Resuscitate” order in a patient’s chart without consent.  The physicians had unilaterally determined that resuscitation […]

Read More…


Mercedes Perez and lawyer Anita Szigeti represented the intervener Mental Health Legal Committee at the Supreme Court of Canada in a case that considered the Superior Court’s jurisdiction to appoint amicus curiae and to fix the amicus’ rate of renumeration.  Read the Supreme Court’s decision in Ontario v. Criminal Lawyers’ Association of Ontario here. […]

Read More…


Mercedes spoke at a Canadian Bar Association professional development program with lawyers Lonny Rosen and Valerie Wise.   The program was titled “Civil Commitment under the Mental Health Act:  Does ‘Brian’s Law’ Go too Far?”.  Mercedes spoke about her work representing the applicants in a constitutional challenge to the Box B and community treatment order […]

Read More…


Mercedes and lawyer Marshall Swadron successfully argued that costs should be awarded in an unsuccessful public interest constitutional challenge. Costs in the amount of $100,000 were awarded to the Empowerment Council in its Charter challenge to the Box B and community treatment order provisions in Ontario’s Mental Health Act. This was a notable accomplishment given […]

Read More…


Alex was successful in seeking the removal of counsel appointed for an incapable person in an end-of-life case at the Consent and Capacity Board. The lawyer, who was appointed for a non-communicating senior, had put forward a personal opinion on the issues in dispute. The Board agreed that it was inappropriate to take a position […]

Read More…