The Court allowed an appeal from two decisions of the Benchers of the Law Society, concluding that the Appellant had acted incompetently in permitting a witness to swear an affidavit and imposing a reprimand. The Panel had erred by making a finding of incompetence when that issue was not before the Panel, making a finding of fact on no evidence, and failing to follow proper procedure in amending the citation.

24. April 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Law Societies – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Barristers and solicitors – Disciplinary proceedings – Judicial review – Evidence – Compliance with legislation – Jurisdiction – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Sheddy v. Law Society of British Columbia, [2007] ...

The Court restored the Canadian Transportation Agency’s decision to order Via to implement remedial measures with respect to certain of its railway cars that were inaccessible to persons with disabilities using personal wheelchairs. The Agency had approached and applied its mandate reasonably and its decision was entitled to extreme deference. Via’s right to procedural fairness had not been breached.

24. April 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Canadian Transportation Agency – Accessibility standards – Human rights complaints – Disability – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Jurisdiction – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Council of Canadians with Disabilities v. Via Rail Canada Inc., [2007] S.C.J. No. 15, Supreme Court ...

The Applicant had filed a complaint with the Respondent Human Rights Commission against the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, in respect of the Ministry’s failure to include a requirement in the Building Code that theatres be equipped with rear window caption boards for the benefit of the hearing impaired. The Commission decided not to refer the complaint to the Human Rights Tribunal. The Court dismissed this application for judicial review of the Commission’s decision, finding that it was reasonable.

27. February 2007 0
Administrative law – Human Rights complaints – Discrimination – Disability – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Regulatory powers of tribunals – Judicial review – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Malkowski v. Ontario (Human Rights Commission), [2006] O.J. No. 5140, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, December 11, 2006, G.D. Lane, J.D. Ground and ...

The Court dismissed an appeal by the Petitioner from the dismissal of its application for judicial review of the process that culminated in the issuance to the Respondent developer of an Environmental Assessment Certificate. The Court found that the Chambers Judge had not erred in finding that the Environmental Assessment Office (EAO) had not breached its duty to provide procedural fairness in the environmental assessment or in finding that the EAO’s agent had afforded the Petitioner a meaningful hearing.

27. February 2007 0
Administrative law – Environmental issues – Environmental Assessment Certificate – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice – Bias R.K. Heli-Ski Panorama Inc. v. Jumbo Glacier Resort Project, [2007] B.C.J. No. 16, British Columbia Court of Appeal, January 8, 2007, Saunders, Levine and Smith JJ.A. The Respondent has ...

The Petitioner sought judicial review of a decision of an adjudicator with the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch who had imposed a four-day suspension of the Petitioner’s liquor licence for supplying liquor to a minor. The Court dismissed the petition and held that the Adjudicator had properly exercised the discretion open to him and his decision was not unreasonable.

27. February 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Liquor Licensing Board – Permits and licences – Penalties and Suspensions – Judicial review – Adjudication – Evidence – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness – Reasonableness simpliciter Butterworth Holdings Ltd. v. British Columbia (General Manager, Liquor Control and Licensing Branch), [2007] B.C.J. No. 10, British Columbia Supreme ...

The Court dismissed an appeal from a judicial review decision which had held that the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal had erred when it found that it had jurisdiction to hear the complaint of some female members of a private golf club who were excluded from the men’s lounge. The Court found that the services provided in the men’s lounge were not customarily available to the public and therefore, s.8 of the Human Rights Code did not apply and the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

27. February 2007 0
Administrative law – Human Rights Complaints – Discrimination – Gender – Sexual orientation – Customarily available to the public – Compliance with legislation – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Jurisdiction to hear a complaint – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness Marine Drive Golf Club v. Buntain, [2007] B.C.J. No. 37, British ...

The Appellant dentist appealed a decision made by the Discipline Committee of the College finding him guilty of professional misconduct and imposing a three-month suspension, terms and conditions related to the practice of orthodontics and costs of $10,000. The Court upheld the College’s decision and dismissed the Appellant’s arguments including reasonable apprehension of bias, issue estoppel/res judicata, inappropriate expert or opinion evidence, and insufficient disclosure by the College.

26. December 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Dental Surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Investigations – Penalties and suspensions – Hearings – Evidence – Statutory provisions – Judicial review – Natural justice – Reasonable apprehension of bias – test – Procedural requirements and fairness – Estoppel and res judicata ...

A First Nations Constable sought judicial review of his dismissal from Police Service arising from complaints of sexual misconduct. The Court quashed the Police Chief’s decision, finding that the Applicant was a public office holder and therefore he was owed a duty of fairness prior to his dismissal, which he had not received.

26. December 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Sexual relations – Penalties and suspensions – Aboriginal issues – Employment law – Termination of employment – Public officer – Labour law – Statutory provisions – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Remedies – Certiorari McDonald v. Anishinabek Police ...

A physician appealed a decision of the Divisional Court upholding the finding of the Discipline Committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario that he was guilty of sexual abuse of a patient. The Appellant argued that he ought to be exempted from the College’s zero tolerance policy regarding sexual relations with patients, on the basis that he had a “spousal” relationship with the patient. The Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the College’s decision met the standard of reasonableness.

26. December 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Physicians and surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Sexual relations with patients – Statutory provisions – Spousal relationship – Mandatory suspensions – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Dr. R.A.R.  v. College of Physicians and ...