An employee (“Dunsmuir”) who was dismissed from his employment at the Department of Justice of the Province of New Brunswick (the “Province”) was unsuccessful in appealing the dismissal. The pragmatic and functional approach was replaced with a standard of review analysis with only two standards of review (correctness and reasonableness) for courts reviewing decisions of administrative tribunals. No consideration needed to be given to a public law duty of procedural fairness because the employment relationship between Dunsmuir and the Province was governed by private law and contract law.

22. April 2008 0
Administrative law – Employment law – Terms of agreement – Termination of employment – Adjudications – Jurisdiction – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Labour and employment boards – Judicial review – Patent unreasonableness – Reasonableness simpliciter – Correctness – Procedural requirements and fairness – Privative clauses – Compliance with legislation Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick, [2008] ...

The Court restored a sanction of dismissal against a municipal police officer who pleaded guilty to several criminal offences. The police officer’s criminal conduct was subject to separate sanctions provided for in the Cities and Towns Act and the Police Act. The majority of the Court held that the sanctions under the Police Act and the Cities and Towns Act overlapped and came into conflict. The Court held that in the case of conflict, the provisions in the Police Act should prevail over the provisions in the Cities and Towns Act as those provisions are more recent and more specific than those in the Cities and Towns Act.

22. May 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Arbitration Board – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Penalties and suspensions – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Statutory interpretation – Conflict of legislation Lévis (City) v. Fraternité des policiers de Lévis Inc., [2007] S.C.J. No. 14, Supreme Court of Canada, March 22, 2007, McLachlin C.J. and Bastarache, ...

The Court restored the Canadian Transportation Agency’s decision to order Via to implement remedial measures with respect to certain of its railway cars that were inaccessible to persons with disabilities using personal wheelchairs. The Agency had approached and applied its mandate reasonably and its decision was entitled to extreme deference. Via’s right to procedural fairness had not been breached.

24. April 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Canadian Transportation Agency – Accessibility standards – Human rights complaints – Disability – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Jurisdiction – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Council of Canadians with Disabilities v. Via Rail Canada Inc., [2007] S.C.J. No. 15, Supreme Court ...

The Ontario Statutory Benefits Tribunal (“SBT “)has jurisdiction to consider the Ontario Human Rights Code in determining whether the Appellants were eligible for support pursuant to the Ontario Disability Support Program Act (“ODSPA”). Statutory tribunals empowered to decide questions of law are presumed to have the power to look beyond their enabling statutes in order to apply the whole law properly to a matter before them. The matter was remitted to the SBT so it could rule on the applicability of section 5(2) of the ODSPA.

27. June 2006 0
Administrative law – Human Rights complaints – Discrimination – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Statutory Benefits Tribunal – Statutory powers – Judicial review – Jurisdiction of tribunal to hear a complaint under the Human Rights Code – Compliance with legislation Tranchemontagne v. Ontario (Director, Disability Support Program), [2006] S.C.J. No. 14, Supreme Court of Canada, April 21, ...

The Supreme Court of Canada held that a decision by the Council of Commissioners of the School Board prohibiting a Sikh student from wearing a kirpan to school infringed freedom of religion guaranteed by section 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

25. April 2006 0
Administrative law – Human rights – Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Freedom of Religion – Decisions of administrative tribunals – School boards – Powers and duties Multani v. Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys, [2006] S.C.J. No. 6, Supreme Court of Canada, March 2, 2006, McLachlin C.J. and Major*, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ. ...

A majority of the Court found that the Defendant Board had exceeded its jurisdiction by requiring the Appellant Public Utility to distribute the net gain from the sale of assets, in part, to its ratepaying customers

28. March 2006 0
Administrative law – Natural resources – Natural gas – Powers under legislation – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Energy and Utilities Board – Sale of assets – Judicial review – Jurisdiction – Statutory interpretation – Legislative compliance – Public interest – Standard of review – Correctness ATCO Gas & Pipelines Ltd. v. Alberta (Energy & Utilities Board), ...

An optometrist (“Zenner”) appealed a decision of the Prince Edward Island College of Optometrists (the “College”) refusing to issue a new licence to Zenner until certain terms and conditions had been met. The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal in part, quashing the condition that Zenner must complete an ethics course as no optometric or medical ethics course was, at the relevant time, accredited or offered by the College.

28. February 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Optometrists – Licence to practice – Training requirements – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Zenner v. Prince Edward Island College of Optometrists, [2005] S.C.J. No. 80, Supreme Court of Canada, December 16, 2005, McLachlin C.J. and Major, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, ...

The Supreme Court of Canada held that federal inmates were entitled to challenge the legality of a decision transferring the inmates from minimum to medium security in a provincial court by way of habeas corpus. In this case, the Court held that habeas corpus should be granted as the Correctional Service of Canada (“CSC”) failed to disclose the scoring matrix for the Security Classification Rating tool upon which the transfer decision had been based.

28. February 2006 0
Administrative law – Prisons – Transfer of inmates – Remedies – Habeas corpus – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Jurisdiction May v. Ferndale Institution, [2005] S.C.J. No. 84, Supreme Court of Canada, December 22, 2005, McLachlin C.J. and Major, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ. The appellant inmates were prisoners serving ...

The language used by Parliament in the Canadian Human Rights Act is wide enough to cover its own employees; therefore, the former Speaker of the House of Commons could not evoke the principles of parliamentary privilege in order to prevent the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal from investigating the Respondent’s complaint. However, the Respondent’s complaints could have been adjudicated under the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act which was intended to be the exclusive method of dispute resolution for such employees. As such, the appeal was allowed.

26. July 2005 0
Administrative law – Government – Employees – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Employment law – Parliamentary employment – Constitutional law – Parliamentary privilege – Application of human rights legislation Canada (House of Commons) v. Vaid, [2005] S.C.J. No. 28, Supreme Court of Canada, May 20, 2005, McLachlin C.J. and Major, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella ...

The Appellants did not have the right to bypass the Administrative Tribunal of Quebec since that body had exclusive jurisdiction to hear appeals in respect of entitlement to minority language education, and that administrative appeal process could not be circumvented

24. May 2005 0
Administrative law – Charter of Rights – Discrimination – Human rights complaints – Language rights – Judicial review application – Quasi-judicial tribunals – Jurisdiction – Appeal process – Compliance with legislation – Remedies – Charter relief Okwuobi v. Lester B. Pearson School Board; Casimir v. Quebec (Attorney General); Zorilla v. Quebec (Attorney General), [2005] S.C.J. No. 16, Supreme ...