Canada Post Corporation (“Canada Post”) successfully appealed from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Tribunal (“WCAT”) that a worker (“Myatt”) had suffered a recurrence of a 1998 compensable stress injury and should be entitled to benefits on the basis that WCAT failed to defer to the decision of the Hearing Officer who had the advantage of hearing oral testimony in the matter

25. May 2004 0
Administrative law – Workers compensation – Benefits – Psychological injury – employment related – Test – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Evidenciary issues – Judicial review – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Canada Post Corp. v. Nova Scotia Workers’ Compensation Appeals Tribunal, [2004] N.S.J. No. 105, Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, March 16, 2004, Roscoe, Chipman and ...

The Ontario Nurses’ Association (the “Association”), representing a nurse who was terminated for innocent absenteeism due to disability (“Tilley”), successfully applied for judicial review of a decision of a Board of Arbitration which had held that the hospital’s failure to pay severance to Tilley did not violate s.15(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the “Charter”)

23. March 2004 0
Administrative law – Employment law – Termination of employment – Severance pay – Human rights complaints – Disability – Charter of Rights – Discrimination – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Arbitration Board – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness Ontario Nurses’ Assn. v. Mount Sinai Hospital, [2004] O.J. No. 162, Ontario Superior Court of Justice – Divisional ...

A teacher with the Scarborough Board of Education (“Layzell”) unsuccessfully applied for judicial review of decisions of the Ontario Human Rights Commission (the “Commission”) regarding complaints she had filed alleging discrimination and reprisal based on her sex and disability as an individual afflicted by multiple sclerosis

23. March 2004 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Teachers – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Duty to accommodate – Judicial review application – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness – Procedural requirements and fairness Layzell v. Ontario (Human Rights Commission), [2003] O.J. No. 5448, Ontario Superior Court of Justice – Divisional Court, January ...

Two probationary officers in the Saskatoon Police Service were dismissed by the Chief of Police as being unsuitable for police service after they committed plagiarism while at Police College. Their Union sought to grieve the dismissals under the collective bargaining agreement. The Employer under the collective agreement, the Saskatoon Board of Police Commissioners, took the position that it lacked the jurisdiction to deal with the grievances because they dealt with discipline issues rather than employer-employee issues. A board of arbitration found the grievances to be arbitrable, and the Chief of Police successfully appealed. The issue on appeal was whether the arbitration board had correctly found that it had jurisdiction to deal with the grievances.

23. March 2004 0
Administrative law – Police – Penalties and suspensions – Plagiarism at police college – Labour law – Arbitration – Collective agreements – Jurisdiction of labour arbitrator to hear disciplinary grievances – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Police Commission – Jurisdiction – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Saskatoon (City) Police Force v. Saskatoon (Police Commission), ...

A physician (“Dr. Young”) successfully appealed both the decision of the Disciplinary Hearing Committee (the “Committee”) of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan (the “College”) in which he was found guilty of unbecoming, improper, unprofessional or discreditable conduct and the associated penalty

23. March 2004 0
Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Evidence – Reliability – Witnesses – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Young v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan, [2004] S.J. No. 21, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, January 13, 2004, Koch J. Dr. Young was ...

ATCO Gas and Pipelines Ltd (“ATCO”) successfully appealed a decision by the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (the “Board”) on the basis that the Board lacked the jurisdiction to allocate to customers some of the proceeds of the sale of assets formerly used for utility purposes

23. March 2004 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Energy and Utilities Board – Jurisdiction – Sale of assets – Judicial review – Privative clauses – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Correctness Atco Gas and Pipelines Ltd. v. Alberta (Energy and Utilities Board), [2004] A.J. No. 45, Alberta Court of Appeal, January 27, 2004, ...

The Appellant provincial municipal assessor (“Assessor”) was granted leave to appeal pursuant to section 63 of the Municipal Assessment Act on the question of whether the municipal board (“Municipal Board”) committed an error of law by determining that the entire real property assessment roll for the Respondent Seagram Company (“Seagram”) was open for review when Seagram appealed its 1999 amended assessment. The success on the appeal was split between the Respondent and the Appellant, with the court finding that the Municipal Board committed an error of law by determining that the real property assessment for one parcel of the Seagram land was open for review because Seagram had no right of appeal in regard to the 1999 amended taxes for that parcel of land, and that the Municipal Board did not commit an error of law by determining that the entire real property assessment for the second parcel of land was open for review when Seagram appealed its 1999 supplementary taxes for roll no. 199700. The matter was referred back to the Municipal Board for further consideration.

27. January 2004 0
Administrative law – Municipalities – Property assessment – Appeals – Jurisdiction – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Right of appeal – Standard of review – Correctness Manitoba (Provincial Municipal Assessor) v. Seagram Co., [2003] M.J. No. 393, Manitoba Court of Appeal, November 3, 2003, Huband, Philp, Twaddle, Hamilton and Freedman JJ.A. Seagram had owned ...

A worker (“Jones”) successfully sought re-hearing of his petition for judicial review of a Workers’ Compensation Board (the “Board”) decision which had denied him a loss of earnings pension. Jones alleged that the reviewing judge wrongly exercised his discretion in refusing a remedy in the nature of certiorari and that the decision was wrong on its merits

27. January 2004 0
Administrative law – Workers compensation – Loss of earnings pension – Judicial review – Evidence – Jurisdiction – Remedies – Certiorari Jones v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Board), [2003] B.C.J. No. 2556, British Columbia Court of Appeal, November 7, 2003, Esson, Donald and Smith JJ.A. Jones initially sought compensation for a work-related injury to his lower back ...

The Appellant medical doctor (“Markman”) was charged with four allegations of professional misconduct, along with an allegation of incompetence

27. January 2004 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Judicial intervention – Physicians and surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Sentencing – Public interest – Suspensions Markman v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, [2003] O.J. No. 3855, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, October 1, 2003, McRae, Gravely and Jennings JJ. ...