Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

Decision Information

Decision Content

CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL TRIBUNAL CANADIEN DES DROITS DE LA PERSONNE

 

 

 

MARC GENEST

Complainant

- and -

CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

Commission

- and -

BELL MOBILITY

Respondent

ORDER FOR THE PRODUCTION OF THE MEDICAL SUMMARY FOR ANTOINE TAMAZ

MEMBER: Roger Doyon

2003 CHRT 45
2003/12/31

(TRANSLATION)

[1] Following the directions issued by the Tribunal on September 9, 2003, the Complainant, Marc Genest, made the commitment to disclose to the Respondent, Bell Mobility, the medical summary of his common-law spouse, Antoine Tamaz, born on April 8, 1963 and died on February 16, 1998.

[2] Counsel for the Respondent, Bell Mobility, informed the Tribunal that she was having difficulty obtaining Antoine Tamaz's medical summary from the Régie de l'assurance-maladie du Québec.

[3] It appears that the Régie de l'assurance-maladie du Québec refuses to comply with the request from counsel for the Respondent, Bell Mobility, unless required to do so by order from the Tribunal.

[4] Therefore, the Tribunal orders:

The Régie de l'assurance-maladie du Québec to provide no later than January 15, 2004 to Johanne Cavé, Esq., 1000 de La Gauchetière St. West, Suite 4100, Montreal, Quebec H3B 5H8, counsel for the Respondent, Bell Mobility, the medical summary for Antoine Tamaz (born April 8, 1963 and died February 16, 1998, health insurance number TAMA63040815) for the period of January 1st, 1990 to January 29, 1996 inclusively, including the following information for each consultation:

  1. date;
  2. name of the consulting physician;
  3. diagnosis or reason for the consultation.

Roger Doyon

December 31, 2003
OTTAWA, Ontario

PARTIES OF RECORD

TRIBUNAL FILE:

T753/0303

STYLE OF CAUSE:

Marc Genest v. Bell Mobility

ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED:

December 31, 2003

APPEARANCES:

Noël Saint-Pierre

For the Complainant

Patrick O'Rourke

For the Canadian Human Rights Commission

Johanne Cavé

For the Respondent

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.