A medical doctor (“Dr. Li”) was unsuccessful in his application for a stay of the decision of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (the “College”) that his license to practice medicine be revoked pending his appeal to the Ontario Superior Court

22. June 2004 0
Li v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, [2004] O.J. No. 1828, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, April 30, 2004, MacFarland J. In December of 2002, the Committee found that Dr. Li had committed acts of professional misconduct involving the improper performance of breast examinations. The penalty imposed was immediate revocation of Dr. Li’s ...

A teacher (“Mr. G”) successfully applied to have anonymous monikers used with respect to his proposed appeal of a decision by the Hearing Sub-Committee (the “Panel”) of the British Columbia College of Teachers (“College”) which laid out his admissions and the penalty of a reprimand

22. June 2004 0
Mr. G v. British Columbia College of Teachers, [2004] B.C.J. No. 944, British Columbia Supreme Court, May 7, 2004, Burnyeat J. Mr. G applied for leave to commence an appeal of the College decision by identifying himself only as “Mr. G”, with his children and the primary complainant also being identified only by initials. Mr. ...

The parents of children living in Labrador Straights in Newfoundland and Labrador claimed that their children have the right to be educated in the minority French language pursuant to Section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom (“the Charter”), within the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. The application was unsuccessful.

22. June 2004 0
Chubbs v. Newfoundland and Labrador, [2004] N.J. No. 174, Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court – Trial Division, May 6, 2004, Fowler, J. The parents of approximately 19 children sued for the right of their children to attend minority language instruction within their own community, rather than travelling over the Quebec border to attend school in ...

C.J.M. was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on two counts of committing mischief. A year later the Nova Scotia Review Board (the “Board”) ordered a disposition which continued a conditional discharge granted to him some months earlier. C.J.M. appealed the conditional discharged contained in the disposition order. C.J.M. alleged that the Board committed certain errors in law, including the failure to follow the principles concerning the duties of a review board in interpreting section 672.54 of the Criminal Code (the “Code”) as set out in Winko v. British Columbia (Forensic Psychiatric Institute), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 625.

22. June 2004 0
R. v. C.J.M., [2004] N.S.J. No. 175, Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, May 6, 2004, Boland J.A. The Capital District Health Authority (“CDHA”) sought leave to intervene in C.J.M.’s appeal. The Crown opposed the intervention. The Crown argued that CDHA could have appealed the Review Board’s Order in its capacity as a party to the ...

A grain producer (“Pender”) successfully applied for judicial review of a decision of the Canadian Grain Commission (the “Commission”) denying the applicant’s claim against security held under the Canada Grain Act, R.S.C. 1985, C.J. 10

22. June 2004 0
Pender Farms Ltd. v. Canada (Canadian Grain Commission), [2004] F.C.J. No. 798, Federal Court, April 29, 2004, O’Keefe J. Under the Canada Grain Act, a scheme exists to protect grain producers that sell to grain dealers who are or become bankrupt, or otherwise refuse to pay, by establishing a monetary security system. The Commission is ...

A business communications company (“Brunico”) which owned two national, biweekly, tabloid-sized publications successfully applied for judicial review of the decision of the Canadian Heritage Minister (“Minister”) to disqualify it for funding in the year 2001-2002 under the Support for Editorial Content Grant Program, where the Minister had applied a test adopted only in January of 2002 to determine whether the publications were newspapers or magazines, and whether they were therefore eligible for funding

22. June 2004 0
Brunico Communications Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), [2004] F.C.J. No. 789, Federal Court, April 30, 2004, Von Finckenstein J. Brunico first applied for funding for its publications under the Support for Editorial Content Grant Program in October of 2000. Brunico received funding totalling more than $200,000. However, on its second application, Brunico was denied funding. ...

An Indian (“Pogson”) within the meaning of the Indian Act successfully applied for a reference under s.74(1) of the Firearms Act (the “Act”) to overturn the decision of a delegate of the Chief Firearms Officer who had rejected her application for a licence to possess and acquire non restricted firearms.

25. May 2004 0
Administrative law – Aboriginal issues – Firearms – licences – Infringement on Aboriginal rights – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Firearms Officer – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence – Judicial notice Pogson v. Alberta (Chief Firearms Officer), [2004] A.J. No. 248, Alberta Provincial Court, March 1, 2004, Demetrick Prov. ...

The Architectural Institute of British Columbia (“AIBC”) was unsuccessful on an application for judicial review of the adjudication of a Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act request for various employment contracts of executives with AIBC, made by a former employee of AIBC (“Redenbach”)

25. May 2004 0
Administrative law – Freedom of information and protection of privacy – Disclosure – Adjudication – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Architectural Institute of British Columbia v. British Columbia (Information and Privacy Commissioner), [2004] B.C.J. No. 465, British Columbia Supreme Court, February 18, 2004, Metzger J. Redenbach requested various information from AIBC, some of ...

Starson, who was found not criminally responsible on account of a mental disorder, had been detained in hospital and unsuccessfully appealed from the disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the “Board”) that he should continue to be detained in a medium security unit, on the basis of the Board’s findings that he represented a significant threat to society, and that the disposition of keeping him in medium security was the least onerous disposition, were unreasonable

25. May 2004 0
Administrative law – Prisons – Inmates Not Criminally Responsible for their crimes – Transfer of inmates – Public safety – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Review Board – Evidenciary issues – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter R v. Starson, [2004] O.J. No. 941, Ontario Court of Appeal, March ...