The Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Divisional Court, confirmed that employees have an evidentiary onus to prove a prima facie case of discrimination before the burden shifts to the employer to provide a credible and rational explanation that its actions were not discriminatory

27. August 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Harassment – Disability – Sexual orientation – Hearings – Judicial review – Evidence Walton Enterprises v. Lombardi, [2013] O.J. No. 3306, 2013 ONSC 4218, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, July 11, 2013, A.M. Molloy, K.E. Swinton and ...

A lawyer was found by the Law Society Appeal Panel to have committed 43 particulars of professional misconduct in relation to 11 clients over a six year period. The penalty imposed on the lawyer, who had a mixed personality disorder with no clear prognosis, was the surrendering of her license with terms. The penalty was appealed to the Ontario Court of Justice but dismissed.

27. August 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Law Societies – Barristers and solicitors – Professional misconduct – Competence – Public interest – Disciplinary proceedings – Penalties and suspensions – Judicial review – Failure to provide reasons Bharadwaj v. Law Society of Upper Canada, [2013] O.J. No. 3252, 2013 ONSC 4329, Ontario Superior Court of ...

The issue in this appeal was whether serious criminal charges, prior to conviction, can found a refusal to grant registration to a medical student

25. June 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Physicians and Surgeons – Professional governance and discipline – Licence to practice – Character evidence – Competence – Public interest – Judicial review – Evidence – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Chauhan v. Heath Professions Appeal ...

Failure to engage in recommended rehabilitation activities can lead to a suspension of a worker’s compensation benefits

25. June 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers Compensation – Benefits – Statutory provisions – Suspension of benefits – Judicial review – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Williams v. New Brunswick (Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission), [2013] N.B.J. No. 133, 2013 NBCA 32, New Brunswick Court ...

An assessment which falls below the minimum standard of care required, but does not lead to a misdiagnosis, may lead to a finding of veterenarian’s unprofessional conduct

25. June 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Veterinary Associations – Veterinarians – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct – Competence – Judicial review – Evidence –  Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Karagic v. Alberta Veterinary Medical Assn., [2013] A.J. No. 481, 2013 ABCA 169, Alberta Court of Appeal, May 21, ...

The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal upheld a tribunal decision that suspended a pharmacist for two years for false, illegal prescriptions. Although the suspension was at the higher end of the scale, the Appeal Court found the penalty fell within the range of permissible outcomes under the reasonableness standard of review.

26. March 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Pharmacists – Pharmacists – Disciplinary proceedings – Investigations – Penalties and suspensions – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Evidence – Jurisdiction of court – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Costs Fadelle v. Nova Scotia College of Pharmacists, [2013] N.S.J. No. 90, ...

With respect to a tribunal’s findings of credibility, there is an important distinction between guessing, conjecture, and speculation on the one hand and drawing legal inferences from evidence where inferences can appropriately be drawn. In this case, the Court in a judicial review proceeding quashed one aspect of a tribunal’s credibility findings on the basis that it was unreasonable.

26. March 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Physicians and surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Investigations – Penalties and suspensions – Judicial review – Evidence – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Ali v. College of Physicians and Surgeons, [2013] S.J. No. 54, 2013 SKQB ...

This was an application by the Chief of the Edmonton Police Service (the “Chief”) for leave to appeal a decision by the Law Enforcement Review Board (the “Board”)

27. December 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Law Enforcement Review Board – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Hearings – Judicial review – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Edmonton (City) Police Service v. Alberta (Law Enforcement Review Board), [2012] A.J. No. 1172, 2012 ABCA 357, Alberta ...

Administrative tribunals do not have to consider and comment upon every issue raised by the parties in their reasons. For reviewing courts, the issue remains whether the decision, viewed as a whole in the context of the record, is reasonable.

27. December 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Labour and employment boards – Labour law – Collective agreements – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Failure to provide reasons – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Construction Labour Relations v. Driver Iron Inc., [2012] S.C.J. No. 65, 2012 SCC 65, Supreme Court of Canada, ...