The applicant was successful in seeking a judicial review order on the basis that the Canadian Human Rights Commission (“Commission”) did not conduct a sufficient/neutral investigation as it ignored crucial evidence and did not address several critical aspects of the applicant’s claim

23. November 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Investigations – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Age – Employment law – Appointment – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Bias – Evidence Hughes v. Canada (Attorney General), [2010] F.C.J. No. 1193, 2010 FC 963, Federal Court, September 27, 2010, ...

Mr. Tsui, an employee of the Respondent, Canada Post, was unsuccessful in bringing an application for judicial review in respect of the Canadian Human Rights Commission’s decision to dismiss his complaint after an initial investigation

26. October 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Investigations – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence – Standard of review – Correctness Tsui v. Canada Post Corp., [2010] F.C.J. No. 1066, 2010 FC 860, Federal Court, August 30, 2010, O’Keefe J. The ...

An investigation conducted by the Canadian Human Rights Commission did not meet the standard of thoroughness and was remitted back to the Commission for reconsideration

26. October 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Human Rights complaints – Discrimination – Disability – Employment law – Appointment – Judicial review – Investigations – Procedural requirements and fairness – Bias Hughes v. Canada (Attorney General), [2010] F.C.J. No. 1036, 2010 FC 837, Federal Court, August 23, 2010, Mactavish J. ...

The appeal by Telus from a CRTC decision was dismissed where the Court found that Telus was not denied procedural fairness as an intervener in the decision-making process

28. September 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission – Hearings – Parties – Intervenor status – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness Telus Communications Co. v. Canada (Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission), [2010] F.C.J. No. 927, 2010 FCA 191, Federal Court of Appeal, July 19, 2010, Evans, Pelletier and ...

Where a body of evidence suggests deficiencies beyond a petitioner’s proposal in a procurement process for contracts, the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (“Tribunal”) ought to have considered whether the evaluators’ procedures, in the procurement process, might have affected the integrity and efficiency of the procurement system more broadly than just the petitioner’s proposal. Additionally, the Tribunal ought to have considered the range of remedies, other than the remedy of compensation, sought by the petitioner.

28. September 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – International Trade Tribunal – Government contracts – Bidding and tendering – Procurements – Approval process – Remedies – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Almon Equipment Ltd. v. Canada (Attorney General), [2010] F.C.J. No. 948, 2010 FCA 193, Federal Court of Appeal, July 20, ...

Robert Latimer (“Latimer”) won a judicial review of the decision of the Appeal Division of the National Parole Board which had refused his request to expand his leave privileges by reducing the number of nights that he was required to return to a halfway house each week

28. September 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – National Parole Board hearings – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Validity and application of policies and guidelines – Standard of review – Correctness Latimer v. Canada (Attorney General), [2010] F.C.J. No. 970, Federal Court Vancouver, British Columbia, August 5, 2010, Mactavish J. In 2001, Latimer ...

The Federal Court of Appeal overturned a decision which held that a Directive that banned smoking both indoors and outdoors at federal correctional facilities was invalid

24. August 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Prison Commissioner – Statutory powers – Prisons – Smoking ban – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation Mercier v. Canada (Correctional Service), [2010] F.C.J. No. 816, 2010 FCA 167, Federal Court of Appeal, June 21, 2010, Nadon, Pelletier and Trudel JJ.A. This was an appeal of a ...

The Applicant, Mr. Khadr, successfully sought judicial review of the decision, made by the Respondent, Canada, not to seek his repatriation from Cuba and its decision to send a diplomatic note to the government of the United States

24. August 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Ministerial orders – Criminal matters – Out of jurisdiction treatment – Extradition and repatriation – Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Life, liberty or security of the person – Judicial review – Jurisdiction – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice – Disclosure – Remedies – Mandamus ...

The Applicant (“Mymryk”) successfully brought an application for judicial review in respect of the Appeal Division’s decision, which affirmed the Parole Board’s decision denying him parole based, in part, on reports that were not disclosed to him

24. August 2010 0
Administrative law – Prisons – National Parole Board hearings – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice – Disclosure Mymryk v. Canada (Attorney General), [2010] F.C.J. No. 779, 2010 FC 632, Federal Court, June 10, 2010, Martineau J. Mymryk, the applicant, served a life sentence for first degree ...

The Court granted an application for judicial review of a decision of the Veterans Review and Appeal Board, which had declined, on reconsideration, not to re-open an appeal decision in respect of the Applicant’s application for a disability pension. The Court found that there were no facts to support the Board’s finding that the Applicant’s disability was connected to an old hockey injury, and that a finding that there was no “new evidence” was unreasonable.

23. March 2010 0
Administrative Law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Veterans Review and Appeal Board – Disability – Pensions – Eligibility – Judicial review – Evidence – Fresh evidence – admissibility – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Armstrong v. Canada (Attorney General), [2010] F.C.J. No. 104, 2010 FC 91, Federal Court, January 27, 2010, Harrington J. ...