The Court quashed a decision of the Appeals Committee of the respondent College refusing to readmit the applicant. The Committee’s reasons were inadequate and amounted to a breach of procedural fairness, and were so sparse as to render the decision unreasonable on the merits.

26. February 2008 0
Administrative law – Universities and colleges – Students – Admissions – Student discipline – Hearings – Procedural requirements and fairness – Failure to provide reasons – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Zeliony v. Red River College, [2007] M.J. No. 470, Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench, December 11, 2007, G.D. Joyal J. ...

The Applicant Consumers’ and Seniors’ Associations challenged a rate increase granted by virtue of an interim ex parte order of the Respondent Public Utilities Board of Manitoba. The Applicants brought a motion for certiorari to quash the order on both procedural and substantive grounds. They were successful in the Court of Queen’s Bench. The Board appealed. The Manitoba Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, and held that the learned motions judge ought not to have granted the Applicants’ motion of certiorari when there was an adequate alternative remedy available, namely to participate in the General Rate Application process.

27. February 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Energy and Utilities Board – Hearings – Ex parte orders – Judicial review – Remedies – Alternative remedies Consumers’ Assn. of Canada (Manitoba) Inc. v. Manitoba (Public Utilities Board), [2006] M.J. No. 464, Manitoba Court of Appeal, December 18, 2006, Huband, Twaddle and Hamilton JJ.A. A rate increase granted ...

The appeal by Histed from his convictions by a panel of the Discipline Committee of the Law Society of Manitoba on two charges of professional misconduct was dismissed. The discipline hearing before the Panel was not a nullity. Any reasonable apprehension of bias that may have existed at the investigative stage was cured by the full and fair hearing on the charges against the Appellant before the Panel. The findings of professional misconduct, the one month suspension and the order of costs, were all decisions that met the applicable standard of review of reasonableness simpliciter.

28. November 2006 0
Administrative law – Barristers and solicitors – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct – Penalties – Suspension – Costs – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Law Societies – Investigations – Fairness – Judicial review – Bias – Natural justice – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Histed v. Law Society of Manitoba, [2006] M.J. No. 290, Manitoba Court of ...

The appeal of the municipality from a decision of a motions judge who found that the doctrine of laches did not apply to an arbitration proceeding was allowed. While the motions judge was correct when he held that the statutory limitations of the Limitations of Actions Act applied to arbitrations under the Arbitration Act, he erred when he concluded that the equitable defence of laches did not apply when statutory limitations applied. The case was therefore remitted back to arbitrator for determination.

28. November 2006 0
Administrative law – Municipalities – Planning and zoning – Arbitration – Laches – Limitations – Judicial review – Delay – Jurisdiction – Standard of review – Correctness – Remedies Rivergate Properties Inc. v. West St. Paul (Rural Municipality), [2006] M.J. No. 281, Manitoba Court of Appeal, July 20, 2006, Scott C.J.M., Steel and Hamilton JJ.A. The parties were ...

The City’s Appeal Committee overturned a Variance Order that allowed the Applicant to subdivide his property. An application for judicial review of this decision was dismissed. The Court held that the Appeal Committee did not err in its interpretation of the criteria set out in section 247(3) of the City of Winnipeg Charter. No manifest injustice occurred and the decision was not arbitrary, oppressive or improper. The Appeal Committee did not act in bad faith and there was no breach of natural justice.

28. November 2006 0
Administrative law – Municipalities – Planning and zoning – Variance orders – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Municipal Appeal Committee – Judicial review – Failure to provide reasons – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice Rohs v. Winnipeg (City), [2006] M.J. No. 275, Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench, July 6, 2006, McCawley J. The Applicant ...

The Province appealed an award made by the Land Value Appraisal Commission pursuant to the Expropriation Act, and argued that the Commission’s valuation had taken into account the imminence of development based on expropriation itself. The Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the Commission had properly set a value on the property that was based on many factors.

Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Land Value Appraisal Commission – Municipalities – Planning and zoning – Property assessment – Expropriation – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness – Reasonableness simpliciter Carloni v. Manitoba, [2006] M.J. No. 125, Manitoba Court of Appeal, April 7, 2006, Scott C.J.M., Twaddle and Monnin JJ.A. The Province ...

The appeal of Shaw Cablesystems (“Shaw”) from the dismissal of its action against MTS Communications (“MTS”) on the ground that the Court did not have jurisdiction to hear the matter was dismissed where the Manitoba Court of Appeal found that the issues appropriately belonged before the Canadian Radio and Telecommunications Commission (“CRTC”)

Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission – Judicial review – Jurisdiction of court – Permits and licences Shaw Cablesystems (SMB) Ltd. v. MTS Communications Inc., [2006] M.J. No. 80, Manitoba Court of Appeal, February 28, 2006, Scott C.J.M., Huband and Hamilton JJ.A. Shaw and MTS competed as providers of ...

The Court prohibited the appointment by both the Applicant Physician and Respondent Authority of certain individuals to an Appeal Committee, on the basis that those appointments would give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias

Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Physicians and surgeons – Competence – Penalties and Suspensions – Medical Advisory Committee – Rules and by-laws – Judicial review – Natural justice – Bias Fong v. Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, [2006] M.J. No. 25, Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench, January 10, 2006, Greenberg J. The Applicant is ...

The applicant directors (the “Applicants”) of a venture capital corporation successfully applied for leave to appeal on issue of whether the fact that the Manitoba Securities Commission (the “Commission”) was named as a co-defendant in a class action suit with the Applicant was sufficient to raise a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of the Commission, and if so, would it be appropriate to grant a stay of the proceedings before the Commission pending a disposition of the class action suit. The Applicants had an arguable case, and the nature of the objection to proceeding before the Commission was of general public interest because of the importance of impartiality and independence in courts and administrative tribunals.

28. February 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Securities Commission – Investigations – Director of corporation – Judicial review – Appeals – Procedural requirements and fairness – Reasonable apprehension of bias – Stay of proceedings – Standard of review – Correctness Curtis v. Manitoba Securities Commission, [2006] M.J. No. 1, Manitoba Court of Appeal, January 10, ...

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 ...