The court held that the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal was without jurisdiction over a complaint arising from the exclusion of women members from the Men’s Lounge at the Marine Drive Golf Club as the Men’s Lounge was not an “accommodations, service or facility customarily available to the public”

27. December 2005 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Gender – Private clubs – Customarily available to the public – Definition – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Jurisdiction – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Correctness Marine Drive Golf Club v. Buntain, [2005] B.C.J. No. 2181, British Columbia Supreme Court, ...

Losenno’s appeal from the dismissal of his application for judicial review of a Human Rights Commission decision not to refer Losenno’s complaint about his former employer to a Board of Inquiry was dismissed where the court found the Commission’s decision was not patently unreasonable

27. December 2005 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Disability – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Jurisdiction – Settlement offers – Effect of – Refusal to refer to Board of Inquiry – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Losenno v. Ontario (Human Rights Commission), [2005] O.J. No. ...

Garvey’s appeal from the decision of the Federal Court dismissing his application for judicial review of the dismissal of his human rights complaint by the Canadian Human Rights Commission was dismissed where the court found that Garvey had never requested accommodation from his employer for his alleged disability

27. December 2005 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Disability – Duty to request accommodation – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Garvey v. Meyers Transport Ltd., [2005] F.C.J. No. 1684, Federal Court of Appeal, October 13, 2005, Desjardins, Evans and Sharlow JJ.A. Garvey was ...

A physician’s appeal of a decision of the Discipline Committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (the “College”) was dismissed where the court found that the Committee’s decision was reasonable and supported by evidence and reasons which stood up to a probing examination

27. December 2005 0
Administrative law – Physicians and Surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct – Penalties – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Dr. R.A.R. v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, [2005] O.J. No. 4219, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, September 14, 2005, ...

A professional engineer (Visser) was successful in obtaining an Order prohibiting the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia (the “Association”) from proceeding with a second inquiry in relation to a complaint made about Visser. The court held that permitting the Association to re-characterize the same conduct and then proceed with a second inquiry would represent an abuse of process.

27. December 2005 0
Administrative law – Engineers – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Association of Professional Engineers – Estoppel and res judicata – Judicial review – Abuse of process Visser v. Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia, [2005] B.C.J. No. 2108, British Columbia Supreme Court, October 5, 2005, Baker J. On October ...

A tenant (“Sullivan”) was successful in appealing the dismissal of her petition for judicial review of an arbitration decision that dismissed her claim to set aside a notice to terminate her tenancy. The arbitrator had dismissed Sullivan’s claim for failing to apply within the time limit. The Court of Appeal held that it was unfair of the arbitrator not to canvass the question of an extension of time with the lay litigant.

23. August 2005 0
Administrative law – Landlord and tenant – Residential tenancy agreements – Termination – Arbitration – Limitations – Extension of time – Judicial review – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness Sullivan v. Strata Plan BCS-251, [2005] B.C.J. No. 1350, British Columbia Court of Appeal, June 17, 2005, Ryan, Mackenzie and Low JJ.A. In the course of ...

A family physician (“Dr. Anstead”) appealed an order of the Joint Medical Professional Review Committee (the “Committee”) requiring him to repay $15,746.72 in professional fees. The Court held that the reasons provided by the Committee were insufficient and referred the matter back to the Committee with a direction to provide supporting reasons for its decision.

23. August 2005 0
Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Billing matters – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Failure to provide reasons – Test – Judicial review – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness Anstead v. Joint Medical Professional Review Committee, [2005] S.J. No. 373, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, ...

A sergeant of the Regina Police Force (“Watson”) was successful in obtaining an order quashing a disciplinary decision on the basis that there was inordinate delay by the Saskatchewan Police Commission (the “Commission”) in responding to Watson’s request for permission to appeal the decision

23. August 2005 0
Administrative law – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Police Commission – Hearings – Appeals – Unreasonable delay – Test – Judicial review – Natural justice – Delay – Privative clauses Watson v. Saskatchewan (Police Commission), [2005] S.J. No. 407, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, June 16, 2005, Hunter J. On December 18, 1999, ...

A teacher (“Kempling”) appealed the decision of the British Columbia Supreme Court dismissing his appeal from a decision of a Hearing Panel of the British Columbia College of Teachers (the “College”) finding him guilty of conduct unbecoming a member of the College, and suspending his teaching certificate for one month. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the court below was not in error in upholding the decision of the Panel. The Court of Appeal held that it was not open for Kempling to raise section 2(a) of the Charter as he had failed to appear before the Panel at the first hearing and laid no evidentiary basis to assess any alleged infringement of his religious freedom.

23. August 2005 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Teachers – Appeals – Evidence – Teachers – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Penalties – Charter of Rights – Freedom of expression – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Correctness Kempling v. British Columbia College ...