The Court dismissed an appeal of a decision of the Consent and Capacity Board, finding the Appellant incapable of managing her property. The decision was a reasonable one and there were insufficient grounds for an apprehension of bias.

24. October 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Consent and Capacity Board – Mental health – Capacity – Substitute decision maker – Judicial review – Bias – Reasonable apprehension of bias – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter L.E. v. Desai, [2006] O.J. No. 3381, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, August 21, 2006, J.M. Spence J. The ...

The Court quashed two Orders of the Governor in Council, first suspending the Applicant without pay from his duties as President and CEO of the Business Development Bank of Canada and, second, terminating his appointment. The Government had failed in its duty to treat the Applicant fairly

24. October 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Ministerial orders – Employment law – Government employees – Termination of employment – Hearings – Fairness – Judicial review – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness Vennat v. Canada (Attorney General), [2006] F.C.J. No. 1251, Federal Court, August 23, 2006, Noël J. The Applicant had been serving as President ...

The Court considered a challenge to the Labour and Employment Board’s decision that the Superintendent of Pensions possessed an implied power to decide an employment status issue, an implied power that was necessarily incidental to the express power to classify employees of a particular employer. The Court held that this decision had a rational basis and was reasonable.

22. August 2006 0
Administrative law – Employment law – Classification – Labour law – Pensions – Eligibility – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Labour and Employment Boards – Employee classification – Judicial review – Jurisdiction – Compliance with legislation – Privative clauses – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Correctness Saint John (City) Pension Board v. New Brunswick ...

The Court quashed the Respondent’s decision to deny benefits to the developmentally and intellectually disabled Petitioner. By structuring its decision on an IQ criteria, the Respondent had acted outside of its jurisdiction and had fettered its own discretion.

22. August 2006 0
Administrative law – Administrative decisions – Community Living authority – Legislation – Validity – Ultra vires – Unlawful delegation of power – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation N.F. (Guardian Ad Litem of) v. Community Living B.C., [2006] B.C.J. No. 1331, British Columbia Supreme Court, June 12, 2006, Chamberlist J. The Petitioner was 19 years of ...

A taxi driver applied for judicial review of the License Appeal Board’s decision upholding the suspension of his taxi driver’s licence and the revocation of his taxi plates. The Court allowed the application on the basis that the City’s Chief Taxi Inspector had not properly submitted his decision to the Taxi Commission for review, which caused the License Appeal Board to lose jurisdiction. The Board had also failed in its duty to follow a rigorous procedure and provide a high degree of fairness.

22. August 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Permits and licences – Taxi Licence Appeal Board – Judicial review – Jurisdiction of tribunal – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence – Standard of review – Correctness – Remedies – Certiorari Barr v. Calgary (City), [2006] A.J. No. 701, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, February 3, 2006, Coutu ...

An engineer appealed from a decision of the Council of the Respondent Association that had found him guilty of conduct that constituted unskilled practice or unprofessional conduct. The Court confirmed one finding of unprofessional conduct, but on a second found that the Council had incorrectly applied the reasonableness standard of review to evidence regarding the appropriate Yukon standard of practice.

22. August 2006 0
Administrative law – Engineers – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct – Penalties and suspensions – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Association of Professional Engineers – Judicial review – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Ellwood v. Assn. of Professional Engineers of Yukon, [2006] Y.J. No. 49, Yukon Territory Supreme Court, June 19, 2006, Veale J. ...

The Appellant energy board appealed from an order of the Divisional Court setting aside the Board’s order on an application for a rate increase brought by the Respondent gas distributor. The Court allowed the appeal, finding that the Board had properly applied the “prudence” inquiry which was required on an application for a rate increase.

27. June 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Energy and Utilities Board – Rate increases – Prudence inquiry – Judicial review – Appeals Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. v. Ontario (Energy Board), [2006] O.J. No. 1355, Ontario Court of Appeal, April 7, 2006, D.H. Doherty, M.J. Moldaver and E.E. Gillese JJ.A. The Ontario Energy Board appealed an ...

The Province appealed an award made by the Land Value Appraisal Commission pursuant to the Expropriation Act, and argued that the Commission’s valuation had taken into account the imminence of development based on expropriation itself. The Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the Commission had properly set a value on the property that was based on many factors.

27. June 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Land Value Appraisal Commission – Municipalities – Planning and zoning – Property assessment – Expropriation – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness – Reasonableness simpliciter Carloni v. Manitoba, [2006] M.J. No. 125, Manitoba Court of Appeal, April 7, 2006, Scott C.J.M., Twaddle and Monnin JJ.A. The Province ...

The Court allowed an appeal from a decision of the Respondent Appeal Board which had set aside the Appellant’s development permit. The Court found that there was a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of one of the members of the Board, and the matter was remitted for a re-hearing.

27. June 2006 0
Administrative law – Municipalities – Planning and zoning – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Subdivision and Development Appeal Board – Hearings – Judicial review – Bias – Natural justice Mountain Creeks Ranch Inc. v. Yellowhead (County) Subdivision and Development Appeal Board, [2006] A.J. No. 398, Alberta Court of Appeal, April 12, 2006, Conrad, Berger and Ritter JJ.A. The ...