Kelly Donovan

*WARNING: This confusing breakdown is as simple as Kelly can make it, considering the circumstances.

When Kelly resigned from policing in July, 2017, she did not sign a non-disclosure clause preventing her from speaking about her experiences, (that is why she released her book and continues to voice her opinions to improve policing legislation).  Kelly even came back to present to the Waterloo Board again in September, 2017.  CTV News covered this appearance.

While Kelly was working on establishing her business, her new career, Waterloo appealed her Workplace Safety and Insurance Board claim for post-traumatic stress disorder treatment she was receiving.  This sent a strong message to Kelly about how much the police service cared if she recovered at all from her work-inflicted injury.

In May, 2018, Kelly filed a lawsuit in Superior Court for breach of contract against the police service. The Board believed the matter should go before the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO), as opposed to Superior Court.    A motion date was set for February, 2019.  Before the motion was heard and a judge decided jurisdiction of her lawsuit...

In June, 2018, the Board filed a case against Kelly at the HRTO asking for the Tribunal to order Kelly stop talking about the Board and order her to pay the Board "significant damages" (it is an attempt to gag her).

In September, 2018, Kelly applied to Superior Court to try to have the Board's case against her dismissed because it is a gag proceeding, (as per Courts of Justice Act, s. 137.1). The result of this application was that, although Justice Favreau did not side with the Board, she ruled that our Anti-SLAPP law does not currently apply to a matter before the HRTO.  The Board could continue to try to gag Kelly.

When Kelly's lawsuit went to court in February, 2019, Justice Doi ruled in favour of the Board, stating that despite the contract that was signed upon her resignation, the Board could in fact file an appeal of her WSIB claim for PTSD benefits.  The original court decision can be read here.  Kelly appealed the ruling, and that is set for Ontario Court of Appeal on October 11, 2019, (see Events page).

Despite the court case being ongoing from the time Kelly filed in May, 2018, the HRTO has proceeded with the Board's case against her, ordering her to comply with multiple requests for documentation, or lose her right to a defence and fair hearing, (even skimming over the fact that Kelly filed her court case before the Board began their action).  A recent decision by the HRTO can be read here.

Kelly sent a Notice of Constitutional Question to the Attorney Generals of both Ontario and Canada in May, 2019, so that they could intervene in the matter, and Ontario's Anti-SLAPP laws could be broadened to protect people from being gagged, no matter the venue, court or an administrative law tribunal.  Essentially, Kelly was working towards making positive legal changes that would benefit all citizens of Ontario and protect freedom of expression on matters of public interest.

Ontario's Attorney General, Douglas Downey refused to intervene, his refusal letter is on the Downloads page.  

Ironically, the HRTO recently issued a decision telling Kelly that, if she believed the HRTO was unconstitutional, she had to take it up at Court.  In this decision, the HRTO also threatened to dismiss Kelly's case because she accused members of the Tribunal of violating their own policies.  That decision can be read here.

The HRTO continues to schedule teleconferences, not public hearings, and are allowing the Board to proceed with their gag proceeding against Kelly, who remains a self-represented litigant.

These ongoing legal proceedings have prevented Kelly from fully implementing her Fit4Duty programmes, but she continues to work in the background to provide even more knowledgable and extensive investigative and consulting services to organizations.