Go Ad Free

The applicant is former Toronto barbecue restaurateur Adam Skelly, represented by his lawyer, Ian Perry of Perrys LLP(Skelly was not in court.)

The Skelly matter goes back to November 2020. That’s when he defied the draconian and nonsensical COVID-19 lockdown rules by opening his west end Toronto eatery for three days. 

Skelly paid a steep price for doing so. He was fined, criminally charged, held in a cell for 30 hours, and put out of business — as in permanently.

Remember Adam Skelly from Adamson Barbecue?

In 2020, he defied COVID lockdowns and opened his Toronto restaurant, facing serious consequences. More than five years later, he’s still fighting it in court.

This is a chilling reminder of how dark the COVID era truly was. pic.twitter.com/I56nzIOuYO

— Lincoln Jay (@lincolnmjay) February 24, 2026

Skelly was also sent an invoice by the city billing him for $187,000 - the cost the city incurred in terms of policing the three-day rebellion.

Perry made mention of these penalties against Skelly in court today. He said 

the way Skelly was treated by the authorities was “over broad and grossly disproportionate.”

Perry also noted that there were many ways Adamson BBQ could have been accommodated. But the City deemed the only option available was to lockdown the restaurant and arrest and fine Skelly.

Perry said the city did not have the right to take Skelly’s property and change the locks; the city should not have sent in the police mounted unit; and there is nothing in the statutes that would allow a medical officer of health (at the time, Dr. Eileen de Villa) to become an occupier of someone else’s private property.

Perry said Adamson’s Charter rights were clearly violated.

However, City of Toronto lawyer Penelope Ma said that in terms of Dr. de Villa’s actions vs. various Charter arguments Dr. de Villa cannot be held to “the standard of perfection.”

Ma testified that the respondent’s arguments are not valid as they are “backward looking” and made with the “advantage of hindsight.”

Ma further noted that Dr. de Villa is “an expert” and ought to be given “deference.”

Ma referenced the case of Taylor vs. Newfoundland and Labrador in justifying the city’s case of locking down Adamson BBQ. 

Kimberly Taylor challenged the province’s 2020 travel bans (under the Public Health Protection and Promotion Act) after being denied entry to attend her mother's funeral.

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that COVID-19 travel restrictions imposed by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador in 2020 were "reasonably justified" as infection numbers soared, lives were lost, and little was known about the COVID virus.

Ma also referenced a health services case in another region in which a spa was shutdown. She says a Section 13 order was used to close the spa (a Section 13 order is similar to a Section 22 order which was used against Skelly.) Ma said the spa posed a health hazard due to its unsanitary conditions and the spa was closed to the public until the health hazard was remedied. Ma says the premises itself was the health risk. Similarly, she says Skelly’s restaurant was the health risk due to permitting indoor dining.

But Perry responded by referencing Dr. Matthew Hodge, the province’s medical expert, who noted that as if May 11, 2021, Ontario had almost 500,000 cases of COVID-19. Dr. Hodge noted restaurants, bars and nightclubs accounted for only 252 cases (in other words, less than .05% of COVID cases could be traced back to restaurants, bars and nightclubs.) And Perry notes that not a single case of COVID was ever traced back to Adamson BBQ. 

The constitutional challenge concluded Friday afternoon. Justice Janet Leiper has reserved her decision.