The Court allowed an Appeal of a decision of the Respondent Association which had found the Appellant guilty of unprofessional conduct on account of the Appellant’s failure to respond to client inquiries. The Court found that the Respondent had erred in law in finding that the Appellant’s actions amounted to unprofessional conduct – the authorities established that any omission to act was required to go beyond mere negligence to be considered unprofessional conduct.

28. April 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Association of Professional Engineers – Engineers – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Evidence Salway v. Assn. of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia, [2009] B.C.J. No. 384, British Columbia Supreme Court, March 2, 2009, R.J. ...

The Court of Appeal allowed an Appeal of a decision of the B.C. Supreme Court, which had found that a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal, that the Appellant was injured in the course of his employment, was patently unreasonable. In making its finding, the Court of Appeal found that the B.C. Legislature had not, by enacting sections 58 and 59 of the Administrative Tribunal’s Act, stepped outside its legislative competence and infringed on a constitutional guarantee of judicial review for the superior courts. Moreover, the effect of the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick was not to change the meaning of patently unreasonable. The application judge, while referring to the correct approach to factual issues, impermissibly weighed the evidence and moved outside the definition of patently unreasonable.

28. April 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers Compensation – Worker – definition – Legislation – Constitutional issues – Ultra vires – Judicial review – Jurisdiction of court – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness – Evidence Manz v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal), [2009] B.C.J. No. 464, British ...

The court quashed a decision of Alberta’s Information and Privacy Commissioner for the City of Edmonton to destroy a data base containing personal information collected by pawnshops. The court found that the Commissioner had erred in his interpretation of municipal law as it related to privacy law.

24. February 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Privacy commissioner – Freedom of information and protection of privacy – Disclosure – Public body – Police – Municipal employees – Electronic records – Collection – review – Standard of review – Correctness Business Watch International Inc. v. Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner), [2009] A.J. No. 24, ...

A taxi operator appealed the decision of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal which had found that he had discriminated against a disabled man by refusing to provide taxi service to him. The court dismissed the appeal, finding that the Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear and determine the complaint, and award costs against the Appellant. The court also rejected the Appellant’s allegation of bias on the part of the Tribunal member.

24. February 2009 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Disability – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Jurisdiction – Right to award costs – Judicial review – Bias – Test – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Correctness Sahota v. Scott, [2008] S.J. No. 836, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, ...

The court held that a section of a by-law, which authorized an animal control officer to destroy a dog based on his belief that it had attacked another animal, was ultra vires the Municipality. The court quashed a decision purportedly made by a municipal officer in reliance on the section, and also held that the officer owed a duty of fairness to the dog owner, that he had not discharged, and which provided a further basis on which to quash the decision.

24. February 2009 0
Administrative law – Municipalities – Animal control – By-laws – Validity – Ultra vires – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Procedural requirements and fairness – Remedies – Certiorari Rogier v. Halifax (Regional Municipality), [2009] N.S.J. No. 19, Nova Scotia Supreme Court, January 16, 2009, D.R. Beveridge J. The Applicant applied for judicial review ...

A drug manufacturer requested judicial review of a recommendation of the Respondent Agency. The Court dismissed the application, finding that the Applicant’s allegation that the Agency secretly or arbitrarily breached a duty of fairness by failing to publish the draft rules of a pilot project, and by failing to strictly follow the draft rules, was without merit.

25. November 2008 0
Administrative law – Judicial review application – Government agencies – Government drug plans – Approval process – Procedural requirements and fairness – Disclosure of rules Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd. v. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, [2008] O.J. No. 4331, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, October 29, 2008, L. K. Ferrier, J. M. ...

The Appellant chiropractor appealed a decision of the discipline committee of the Respondent College, which had found him guilty of professional misconduct because he had sexually abused a patient. The Court allowed the appeal, finding that the committee’s failure to consider the Appellant’s pre-existing intimate relationship with the alleged victim, before she became a patient, or to consider the College’s policies regarding treatment of family members, rendered its decision unreasonable.

25. November 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Chiropractors – Chiropractors – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Sexual relations with patient – Spousal relationship – Treating family members – Judicial review – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Leering v. College of Chiropractors of Ontario, [2008] O.J. ...

A veterinarian appealed a decision of the Respondent Association, which had found him guilty of unprofessional conduct for inappropriately trapping, handling, and marketing white-tailed deer. The Court allowed the appeal and quashed the Association’s decision, on the basis that it had admitted into evidence a videotaped statement without a correct consideration of the applicable principles, contrary to specific provisions in the Wildlife Act and in breach of the discipline committee’s duty of fairness.

25. November 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Veterinary Associations – Veterinarians – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Judicial review – Hearsay evidence – admissibility – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness – Compliance with legislation – Witnesses – Failure to provide adequate reasons – Standard of review – Correctness ...

The Applicant applied for judicial review of a decision of the Ontario Human Rights Commission. The Complainant had filed a complaint against the Toronto Police Services Board and its chief with the Commission, alleging discrimination in the provision of services because of her race and colour. The Commission decided not to deal with the complaint because the crux of the complaint related to matters that occurred when criminal charges were laid against the Complainant, some fourteen months before she filed the complaint, and the Commission was not satisfied that the delay in filing the complaint was incurred in good faith. The Court dismissed her application for judicial review, finding that the Commission’s decision was reasonable, and that even if there had been any merit to the application for judicial review, it would have been denied because of the inordinate delay in bringing the application (18 months) and because there would have been no useful purpose served by granting the relief sought.

23. September 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Race – Judicial review – Delay – Jurisdiction – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Jeremiah v Ontario (Human Rights Commission), [2008] O.J. No. 3013, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, July 11, 2008, L.K. Ferrier, R.W.M. Pitt ...