A disposition by the Ontario Review Board (the “Board”) allowing an accused found not guilty by reason of insanity and who remained a significant threat to the safety of the public, to be transferred to his country of origin for care and supervision was found unreasonable by the Court of Appeal. In finding that the disposition was unreasonable, the Court held that the existence of a deportation order was irrelevant to the Board’s consideration whether to return a dangerous patient to his native land and should not have been considered.

25. November 2003 0
Administrative law – Prisons – Transfer of inmates – Deportation orders – Statutory provisions – Criminal Code – Public safety – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Review Board – Judicial review – Jurisdiction R. v. Miller, [2003] O.J. No. 3455, Ontario Court of Appeal, September 10, 2003, Charron, Feldman and Simmons JJ.A. Miller was found not guilty ...

The Minister of Health Planning was successful in overturning a portion of the remedy aspect of a decision of the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal directing the Minister to amend the birth registration form to provide an option of identifying as a parent, a non-biological parent who is the co-parent of a mother or a father. The court found that the Human Rights Tribunal was within its jurisdiction to Order that the Minister cease discriminating against same gender parents but exceeded its jurisdiction in directing that the Minister take specific steps with respect to altering the birth registration form.

23. September 2003 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Jurisdiction – Remedies – Declaratory relief – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Sexual orientation – Gender – Parent – definition – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness British Columbia (Minister of Health Planning) v. British Columbia (Human Rights Tribunal), [2003] B.C.J. No. 17552, British ...

Dr. Anstead was unsuccessful in his application for a judicial review of the decision of the executive committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan appointing a competency committee. The court held that Dr. Anstead failed to establish that the committee conducting the assessment had violated confidentiality requirements of the by-laws or otherwise exceeded its jurisdiction in reporting its concerns to the College.

23. September 2003 0
Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Governance – Competence committee – Confidentiality of findings – Jurisdiction – Public interest – Judicial review application Anstead v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan, [2003] S.J. No. 463, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, May 26, 2003, G.A. Smith J. Anstead was a registered physician with the College ...

The Workers’ Compensation Commission was unsuccessful in appealing a decision of the Trial Division which had overturned a decision of one of the Commission’s internal review specialists relating to whether or not the Commission was entitled to maintain a subrogated action. The Court of Appeal found that the decision of the internal review specialist was patently unreasonable as it resulted from an inappropriate approach to statutory interpretation.

23. September 2003 0
Administrative law – Workers compensation – Subrogated actions – Administrative decisions – Statutory provisions – Use – Definition – Statutory interpretation vs. judicial interpretation – Judicial review application – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Warford v. Weir’s Construction Ltd., [2003] N.J. No. 178, Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court – Court of Appeal, July 17, 2003, Cameron, ...

Gill was successful in having the Court of Appeal set aside the decision of the B.C. Securities Commission that the newly formed CDNX stock exchange had jurisdiction to discipline Gill for alleged breaches of the rules of the Vancouver Stock Exchange, a predecessor to the CDNX

23. September 2003 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Securities Commission – Compliance with rules and by-laws – Jurisdiction – Stock brokers – Disciplinary proceedings – Governance – Restructuring of stock exchanges – Survival of contracts – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness Gill v. Canadian Venture Exchange Inc., [2003] B.C.J. No. 1767, British Columbia Court ...

A psychiatric nurse (“Bennet”) was successful in his appeal from a decision of the Discipline Committee of the Registered Psychiatric Nurses’ Association of Manitoba (the “Association”). The court found that the Committee’s decision finding Bennet guilty of professional misconduct for having sexual intercourse with a former client was not reasonable as the Committee did not have sufficient evidence before it on the threshold issue of boundaries and/or therapeutic relationships.

26. August 2003 0
Administrative law – Psychiatric Nurses – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Sexual relations with former patient – Boundaries and therapeutic relationships – Judicial review – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Evidence Bennet v. Registered Psychiatric Nurses’ Assn. of Manitoba, [2003] M.J. No. 163, Manitoba Court of Appeal, May 15, 2003, Monnin, Hamilton ...

A helicopter pilot (“Veideman”) was unsuccessful in his application for judicial review of the decision of the Appeal Panel of the Civil Aviation Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) where the court found that the Tribunal had not erred in concluding that Veideman had not exercised due diligence to prevent the contravention of a regulation by unlawfully operating an aircraft at a distance of less than 500 feet from a person

26. August 2003 0
Administrative law – Pilots – Disciplinary proceedings – Due diligence – Evidence – Judicial review application – Administrative decisions – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Veideman v. Canada (Minister of Transport), [2003] F.C.J. No. 751, Federal Court of Canada – Trial Division, May 12, 2003, Snider J. Veideman was a helicopter pilot transporting skiers in ...

The applicant (“Smith”) was unsuccessful in his application seeking an order that the Ombudsman reconsider its decision with respect to Smith’s complaint that the Alberta Department of Energy unfairly administered Smith’s application for a Small Power Research Allocation. The court found that no lack of jurisdiction had been shown on the part of the Ombudsman and the court was unwilling to substitute its own conclusions for those of the Ombudsman.

26. August 2003 0
Administrative law – Judicial review – Ombudsman – Jurisdiction – Privative clauses Smith v. Alberta (Ombudsman), [2003] A.J. No. 688, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, May 29, 2003, Lee J. In 1998, the Small Power Research and Development Act and Regulations were enacted by the Alberta Government to provide the authority to allocate to an eligible ...

The Board of School Trustees of School District No. 81 (the “School Board”) was successful in its appeal of an arbitration award in which the arbitrator found that the benefit plan of the School Board (the “Plan”) was discriminatory under section 15(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the British Columbia Human Rights Code, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 210 in restricting dual coverage where both spouses were teachers. The court found that the Plan was not discriminatory as there was no deprivation of a benefit.

26. August 2003 0
Administrative law – Teachers – Labour law – Arbitration – Benefit plans – Dual coverage – Judicial review – Human rights complaints – Charter of Rights – Discrimination British Columbia Public School Employers’ Assn. v. British Columbia Teachers’ Federation, [2003] B.C.J. No. 1272, British Columbia Court of Appeal, May 30, 2003, Huddart, Braidwood and Thackray JJ.A. The Fort Nelson ...