A veterinarian appealed a decision of the Respondent Association, which had found him guilty of unprofessional conduct for inappropriately trapping, handling, and marketing white-tailed deer. The Court allowed the appeal and quashed the Association’s decision, on the basis that it had admitted into evidence a videotaped statement without a correct consideration of the applicable principles, contrary to specific provisions in the Wildlife Act and in breach of the discipline committee’s duty of fairness.

25. November 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Veterinary Associations – Veterinarians – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Judicial review – Hearsay evidence – admissibility – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness – Compliance with legislation – Witnesses – Failure to provide adequate reasons – Standard of review – Correctness ...

The Court dismissed the appeal by the Human Rights Commission (the “Commission”) from a decision of the Human Rights Tribunal finding that the complainant’s disciplinary suspension from school for profanity did not constitute discriminatory conduct. Although the complainant suffered from Williams Syndrome and was mentally retarded, there was no evidence to show that profanity was a characteristic common to persons with Williams Syndrome and suspensions were regularly used by the school as a form of discipline and 8 to 10 students would be suspended during any school year. As long as suspensions were used in a non-discriminatory manner, they were permissible and no prima facie case of discrimination had been made out.

28. October 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Schools – Suspension of students – Human Rights complaints – Discrimination – Disability – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness – Evidence Saskatchewan (Human Rights Commission) v. Prince Albert Roman Catholic School Division No.6, [2008] S.J. No. 434, 2008 SKQB 227, ...

The University applied for judicial review of an interim award of an arbitration panel which had found that a grievance brought by the Respondent, a medical resident, was arbitrable pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement. The University challenged the jurisdiction of the arbitration panel on the ground that the issue was academic in nature and thus not arbitrable. The application was dismissed.

27. May 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Arbitration Board – Universities – Student discipline – Medical residents – Harassment – Judicial review – Labour law – Collective agreements – Arbitration – Jurisdiction of labour arbitrator to hear disciplinary grievances University of Saskatchewan v. Wilde, [2007] S.J. No. 736, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, October ...

There is no unfettered right to possess firearms in Canada, notwithstanding the preamble of the British North America Act, 1867, which the applicant suggested incorporated the English Bill of Rights, 1689, allowing Protestant subjects to have firearms for their defence. There was a legislative history in Canada that heavily regulated gun ownership, and s.117.03 of the Criminal Code, allowing for seizure and destruction of an unlicensed firearm was intra vires the federal Parliament, as the regulation of the possession of a firearm was within the sphere of its criminal law power. This provision did not violate the applicant’s rights under ss.7 and 26 of the Charter, and there was no evidentiary basis that the applicant needed the firearm for his personal security. There was also no breach of the applicant’s fundamental justice, even if the 1689 Bill of Rights was part of the Canadian Constitution, s.26 of the Charter did not guarantee the rights therein.

22. April 2008 0
Administrative law – Firearms registration – Legislation – Criminal code – Ultra vires – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Right to bear arms Hudson v. Canada (Attorney General), [2007] S.J. No. 693, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, December 12, 2007, N.G. Gabrielson J. The applicant, a doctor ...

Duty of fairness in investigative stage is only limited, and investigating members authorized by the professional conduct committee of the Institute of Chartered Accountants to investigate the complaint met their duty by advising the applicant accountant of the generalities of what was being investigated. There was no obligation to provide full particulars. However, the professional conduct committee’s recommendation to hold a hearing was subject to judicial review, prior to the hearing being held. The decision had a significant adverse effect on the applicant and, as the professional conduct committee owed a duty of fairness to the applicant accountant, that duty of fairness may be defeated if judicial review was unavailable. Finally, the professional conduct committee had jurisdiction to investigate matters not specified in the complaint because these matters were sufficiently closely related to the complaint, it was in the context of public interest, there was lack of precise technical knowledge on the part of the public, and the legislative powers to investigate a complaint given to the committee were broad.

22. April 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Institute of Chartered Accountants – Accountants – Disciplinary proceedings – Investigations – Procedural fairness – Bias – Evidence – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation  – Jurisdiction – Public interest Swanson v. Institute of Chartered Accountants of Saskatchewan, [2007] S.J. No. 701, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, ...

The application by a group of parents with children attending at Wilcox School for an interlocutory mandatory injuction preventing and restraining the Board of Education (the “Board”) from acting upon a resolution to close the Wilcox Public School was dismissed where the Court found that the Applicants had not established a strong prima facie case

27. October 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – School boards – Schools – Closures – Parental rights – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Remedies – Injunctions Metz v. Saskatchewan Board of Education of the Prairie Valley School Division No. 208, [2007] S.J. No. 454, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, July 26, 2007, ...

A successful appeal was brought by residents of an apartment building that was ordered demolished despite a Letter of Request filed by the Appellants requesting an adjournment because their legal counsel could not attend at the Council meeting where the determination was made

26. December 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Municipal councils – Landlord and tenant – Conduct of tenant – By-laws – Practice and procedure – Administrative tribunals – Adjournment – Failure to provide reasons – Appeals – Disclosure – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice – Remedies – Alternative remedies Markwart v. Prince Albert (City), ...

The Law Society of Saskatchewan’s application for an Order authorizing an Inspector of the Law Society to enter the office of M Law Firm to obtain privileged file materials relating to a client (“MH”) was dismissed where the Court found that the circumstances of the case did not meet the test of “absolute necessity”

28. November 2006 0
Administrative law – Barristers and solicitors – Solicitor-client privilege – Law Societies – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Disclosure – Absolute Necessity Law Society of Saskatchewan v. E.M., [2006] S.J. No. 608, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, August 10, 2006, Hunter J. The Law Society received a complaint from a person who was adverse ...

The University of Saskatchewan (the “University”) applied for judicial review of a decision of the Visitor of the University directing that the Respondent, Dr. Pearlman, be permitted to continue his residency at the College. The Court of Appeal allowed the application and remitted the matter back to the Visitor for further consideration. The Court held that the standard of review in this case was patent unreasonableness. Although the Court held that the Visitor had broad remedial powers to investigate the matter, the Court overturned its decision, as it did not comply with the Labour Standards Act.

28. November 2006 0
Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Competence – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Universities – Evaluation of residents – Labour law – Working conditions – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Pearlman v. University of Saskatchewan, [2006] S.J. No. 618, Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, September 27, 2006, Cameron, Lane and ...

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal by Preston Crossing Properties (“Preston”) of an assessment decision by the Municipal Board Committee upholding an assessor’s application of a 72% market adjustment factor to the buildings, based on a notable traffic increase to the buildings rendering them more valuable than other nearby buildings. The Committee did not err in concluding that Preston was given full opportunity to develop and state its case before the Board of Revision and in upholding the market adjustment factor of .72 (as opposed to .61 in valuing buildings Preston regarded as comparable to its own) for the purposes of the assessment.

25. July 2006 0
Administrative law – Municipalities – Property assessment – Market adjustment factor – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Assessment Appeal Board – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Fairness – Judicial review – Evidence – Admissibility – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice Preston Cross Properties Inc. v. Saskatoon (City), [2006] S.J. No. 335, Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, ...