The Appeal of Genex from a decision of the CRTC cancelling its radio broadcast licence was dismissed as Genex was unable to establish a breach of the principles of natural justice, the standards of procedural fairness or the CRTC’s own rules of procedure. It was also unable to demonstrate a jurisdictional error or a material error in law that would render the decision unreasonable.

22. November 2005 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission – Permits and licences – Suspensions – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice – Charter of Rights – Freedom of expression Genex Communications Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), [2005] F.C.J. No. 1440, Federal Court of Appeal, September 1, 2005, Richard C.J., Létourneau ...

An application brought by way of judicial review to quash a school closing bylaw was dismissed as the Court held that the process of closing the school was, as a whole, fundamentally fair and the Petitioners had adequate opportunity to consult with the School Board before the final decision was made to close the school

22. November 2005 0
Administrative law – Schools – Closures – Parental rights – Decisions of administrative tribunals – School boards – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness Kelley v. Saanich School District No. 63, [2005] B.C.J. No. 1952, British Columbia Supreme Court, September 9, 2005, Sigurdson J. An application was brought by way of judicial review to quash a ...

An application for judicial review with respect to issues relating to an ongoing disciplinary hearing under the Alberta Police Act was dismissed on the basis of prematurity

22. November 2005 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Police Commission – Disciplinary proceedings – Hearings – Pending hearings – Discretion of court to interfere – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Bias – Remedies – Availability Smyth v. Edmonton (City) Police Service, [2005] A.J. No. 1216, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, September 6, 2005, Lefsrud J. The ...

The Court dismissed the appeal of Psychologist “Y” from the decision of the lower Court dismissing his assertion that the Nova Scotia Board of Examiners had no jurisdiction to pursue charges against him. The Court of Appeal held that an Order of prohibition was a drastic remedy to be used only in the clearest of cases and, in this case, it was desirable to have a full hearing and a determination of the issues on the merits. It was not clear that the Board had no authority to continue with the proceeding.

22. November 2005 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Board of Examiners of Psychologists – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Accreditation – Misrepresentation – Jurisdiction of tribunal – Judicial review – Stay of proceedings – Remedies – Prohibition – Availability Psychologist “Y” v. Nova Scotia Board of Examiners in Psychology, [2005] N.S.J. No. 350, ...

The purported revocation of the Respondents’ motor vehicle dealer licences by the Registrar under the Ontario Motor Vehicle Dealers Act was invalid as the revocation was made without giving the dealers a right to a hearing, which right was absolute under section 7 of the Act

22. November 2005 0
Administrative law – Permits and licences – Suspensions – Compliance with legislation – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Motor Vehicle Dealers – Hearings – Right to hearing Amerato v. Ontario (Motor Vehicle Dealers Act, Registrar), [2005] O.J. No. 3713, Ontario Court of Appeal, September 8, 2005, K.N. Feldman, E.E. Gillese and H.S. LaForme JJ.A. An appeal was ...

A Hearing Officer stayed a disciplinary hearing under the Ontario Police Services Act on the basis that the hearing would constitute an abuse of process after the accused police officer had been acquitted on criminal charges arising from the same conduct that triggered the hearing. This decision was quashed on judicial review as the court found that proceeding with the disciplinary hearing would not constitute an abuse of process.

22. November 2005 0
Administrative law – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Criminal charges – Evidence – Hearings – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Police Commission – Abuse of process – Test – Judicial review – Stay of proceedings – Standard of review – Correctness Peel (Regional Municipality) Police Service v. Watson, [2005] O.J. No. 3525, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, August 18, ...

A former student of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario brought an application for judicial review of a decision of the Appeal Committee of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario (“ICAO”) which allowed an appeal from the sanction imposed by the Discipline Committee and ruled that the student’s name was to be disclosed in the publication reporting the sanction and that his discipline file was not to be sealed. The court held that the decision of the Appeal Committee was reasonable and the application was therefore dismissed.

27. September 2005 0
Administrative law – Accountants – Disciplinary proceedings – Suspensions – Penalties – Publication ban – Judicial review – Jurisdiction of tribunal – Disclosure – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter John Doe v. Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario, [2005] O.J. No. 3013, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, July 14, 2005, P.T. Matlow, E.M. Macdonald and ...

The Liquor Control Board of Ontario (the “LCBO”) appealed the decision of the Ontario Divisional Court overturning the decision of an Administrative Tribunal refusing to issue a witness summons requested by a liquor licensee, Lifford Wine Agencies (“Lifford”), on a motion to stay a hearing before the Tribunal in which the possible revocation of Lifford’s licence was at issue. Lifford asserted that its right to a fair hearing was irreparably compromised by interference with witnesses it proposed to call to give evidence in support of its defence to allegations that it violated provisions of the Ontario Liquor Licence Act and applied for a motion to stay the hearing. During an adjournment in the stay motion, the LCBO engaged the services of a private investigator. The investigator interviewed most of the witnesses summoned by Lifford. Lifford sought the issuance of a summons to require the investigator to provide evidence before the Tribunal on the stay motion and to produce transcripts or other recordings of the interviews. The Tribunal declined to issue a summons on the basis that the investigator’s proposed evidence was irrelevant to the subject matter of the stay motion. On judicial review, the Divisional Court overturned the ruling and this decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal.

27. September 2005 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Liquor Licensing Board – Permits & licences – Stay of proceedings – Appeals – Hearings – Judicial review application – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Witness tampering – Natural justice – Evidence – Privilege Ontario (Liquor Control Board) v. Lifford Wine Agencies, [2005] O.J. No. 3042, Ontario ...

The Consumers’ Association of Canada (Manitoba) Inc. and the Manitoba Society of Seniors (the “Applicants”) applied for judicial review of an Order made by the Public Utilities Board of Manitoba (the “Board”) with respect to an ex parte Order of the Board that permitted Centra Gas Manitoba Inc. (“Centra”) to increase its natural gas rates by approximately 10% effective February 1, 2005 without any notice to or input from Centra’s customers. The court held that there was no evidence presented to the Board that supported the exceptional requirements necessary to justify of an ex parte hearing. The Board therefore should not have heard Centra’s interim application on an ex parte basis and the Applicants were entitled to an Order quashing the interim rate increase ordered by the Board following the ex parte hearing.

27. September 2005 0
Administrative law – Natural resources – Natural gas – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Energy and Utilities Board – Rate increases – Appeals – Hearings – Procedural requirements and fairness – Ex parte orders – Evidence – Interpretation of legislation – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness Consumers’ Assn. of Canada (Manitoba) Inc. v. Manitoba (Public ...