A World War II veteran who fell twice from a Bren gun carrier during active service (“Bremner”), succeeded on his application for judicial review of a decision of the Veterans Review and Appeal Board (the “Board”) which had determined that his degenerative disc disease and lower back pain was not attributable to his war service, and that he was not entitled to a pension in respect of that injury

28. March 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Veterans Review and Appeal Board – Pensions – Eligibility – Judicial review – Jurisdiction – Evidence – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Bremner v. Canada (Attorney General), [2006] F.C.J. No 122, Federal Court, January 30, 2006, Strayer D.J. When Bremner enlisted, he reported no ...

VIA Rail succeeded in appealing a finding of the Canadian Transport Agency (the “Agency”) that the VIA Rail meal distribution policy constituted an undue obstacle to the mobility of a passenger who used an electric wheelchair (“Sikand”)

28. March 2006 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Disability – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Canadian Transportation Agency – Obstacle to the mobility of a passenger – Discrimination – Judicial review – Jurisdiction of tribunal – Statutory interpretation – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Correctness Via Rail Canada Inc. v. Canada (Canadian Transportation ...

An Application by T.C. for review of the Parole Board Appeal Division’s decision dismissing his appeal from the Parole Board’s refusal to grant him accelerated day parole was dismissed. The Court held that the Parole Board and Appeal Division did not breach their duty of fairness by relying on allegations in a Police Report which were denied by T.C. T.C. was afforded full opportunity to respond to the Board’s concerns.

28. March 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – National Parole Board hearings – Prisons – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence – Standard of review – Correctness T.C. v. Canada (Attorney General), [2005] F.C.J. No. 2163, Federal Court, November 29, 2005, Mactavish J. The National Parole Board (“NPB”) refused to grant accelerated day parole ...

The Court set aside an Order in Council removing the Applicant from his position as Chairman of the Board of Directors of VIA Rail. The Governor General in Council had breached the duty to act fairly by not informing the Applicant of the reason or reasons for dissatisfaction with him and not giving him the opportunity to be heard.

24. January 2006 0
Administrative law – Employment law – Appointment – Termination of employment – Legislation – Orders-in-council – Validity – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness Pelletier v. Canada (Attorney General), [2005] F.C.J. No. 1891, Federal Court Montréal, Quebec, November 18, 2005, Noël J. In 2001, the Applicant had been appointed to hold office at pleasure for a ...

An application for judicial review by the Applicant in respect of two discretionary conditions of the Applicant’s long-term offender order which were confirmed by the National Parole Board (“NPB”) was dismissed. The NPB’s decision to impose a condition that the Applicant take medication was correct and, even though such a condition offended section 7 of the Charter, it could be saved under section 1. The no contact condition was reasonable and was therefore not subject to judicial review.

27. December 2005 0
Administrative law – National Parole Board hearings – Discretionary conditions – Long-term offenders – Statutory provisions – Criminal Code – Public safety – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness – Reasonableness simpliciter Deacon v. Canada (Attorney General), [2005] F.C.J. No. 1827, Federal Court, November 4, 2005, Teitelbaum J. The Applicant brought an application for ...

An appeal of a decision of an applications judge that the evidence in support of applications for judicial review be restricted to the certified Tribunal record was allowed. The applications judge erred in failing to consider that evidence outside of the administrative record can be considered where the grounds for review are any of the various forms of jurisdictional error.

27. December 2005 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Marital status – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Judicial review applications – Evidence – admissibility – Jurisdiction McFayden v. Canada (Attorney General), [2005] F.C.J. No. 1817, Federal Court of Appeal, November 2, 2005, Desjardins, Evans and Sharlow JJ.A. An applications judge granted the Respondent’s motion ...

The judicial review of a decision of the Minister of Transport was dismissed as the court held that the Minister acted in good faith, the principles of natural justice were observed, and that the decision was not based on irrelevant or extraneous considerations

27. December 2005 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Ministerial orders – Port divestiture – Judicial review – Natural justice and legitimate expectations – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Newfoundland and Labrador v. Canada (Minister of Transport), [2005] F.C.J. No. 1825, Federal Court, November 2, 2005, Harrington J. In March 2003, Transport ...

Garvey’s appeal from the decision of the Federal Court dismissing his application for judicial review of the dismissal of his human rights complaint by the Canadian Human Rights Commission was dismissed where the court found that Garvey had never requested accommodation from his employer for his alleged disability

27. December 2005 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Disability – Duty to request accommodation – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Garvey v. Meyers Transport Ltd., [2005] F.C.J. No. 1684, Federal Court of Appeal, October 13, 2005, Desjardins, Evans and Sharlow JJ.A. Garvey was ...

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 ...

A decision of the Canadian Human Rights Commission (the “Commission”) to institute an inquiry into a complaint after an Investigator appointed by the Commission recommended dismissal of the complaint did not attract the duty of procedural fairness to provide written reasons. In certain circumstances, the duty of procedural fairness requires the provision of a written explanation of a decision where the decision has important significance for the individual and where there is a statutory right of appeal. This was not such a case.

25. October 2005 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Investigations – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Judicial review – Failure to provide reasons – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v. Durrer, [2005] F.C.J. No. 1321, Federal Court, August 8, ...