Here's Why Clayton Ruby Thinks the Supreme Court Should Decide Mayor Rob Ford's Fate




Here’s Why Clayton Ruby Thinks the Supreme Court Should Decide Mayor Rob Ford’s Fate

The legal team that brought Ford's mayoralty to the brink of disaster now wants to take the case to Canada's highest court.

In January, when the Divisional Court found Mayor Rob Ford innocent of his alleged breach of the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, thus preventing him from being booted from office, Clayton Ruby and Nader Hasan—lawyers for Paul Magder, who brought the case against Ford—vowed to appeal to the only higher judicial power there is. This morning, Ruby’s office released a document that summaraizes the arguments he and Hasan will be using in an attempt to get an audience with the Supreme Court of Canada.

The thing about the Supreme Court is that it won’t listen to just any case. A lawyer usually needs to convince the court that its intervention would be in the public interest. Ruby and Hasan’s factum, embedded after the jump, shows how they plan to bring the court around to that point of view.

The factum argues that a new hearing on Ford’s conflict-of-interest suit would serve the public by allowing the Supreme Court to clarify some technical issues to do with how much legal wiggle room a municipality should have in governing itself. In particular, the lawyers take issue with the Divisional Court’s opinion that city council exceeded its legal authority when it ordered Ford to pay back some donations he’d solicited improperly for his football foundation. (Ford’s refusal to comply with that order is what eventually led to the lawsuit.)

Ruby and Hasan argue that the Divisional Court’s finding, if allowed to stand, would have cascading legal consequences that would eventually make it harder for cities to conduct their own affairs.

It’s not clear when we’ll know whether or not the Supreme Court has granted Ruby, Hasan, and Magder their appeal, though Ruby’s office will be filing the factum later today. The court dismisses a vast majority of cases.

The full text of the factum is below.