A tenant (“Sullivan”) was successful in appealing the dismissal of her petition for judicial review of an arbitration decision that dismissed her claim to set aside a notice to terminate her tenancy. The arbitrator had dismissed Sullivan’s claim for failing to apply within the time limit. The Court of Appeal held that it was unfair of the arbitrator not to canvass the question of an extension of time with the lay litigant.

Administrative law – Landlord and tenant – Residential tenancy agreements – Termination – Arbitration – Limitations – Extension of time – Judicial review – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness Sullivan v. Strata Plan BCS-251, [2005] B.C.J. No. 1350, British Columbia Court of Appeal, June 17, 2005, Ryan, Mackenzie and Low JJ.A. In the course of ...

A family physician (“Dr. Anstead”) appealed an order of the Joint Medical Professional Review Committee (the “Committee”) requiring him to repay $15,746.72 in professional fees. The Court held that the reasons provided by the Committee were insufficient and referred the matter back to the Committee with a direction to provide supporting reasons for its decision.

Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Billing matters – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Failure to provide reasons – Test – Judicial review – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness Anstead v. Joint Medical Professional Review Committee, [2005] S.J. No. 373, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, ...

A sergeant of the Regina Police Force (“Watson”) was successful in obtaining an order quashing a disciplinary decision on the basis that there was inordinate delay by the Saskatchewan Police Commission (the “Commission”) in responding to Watson’s request for permission to appeal the decision

Administrative law – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Police Commission – Hearings – Appeals – Unreasonable delay – Test – Judicial review – Natural justice – Delay – Privative clauses Watson v. Saskatchewan (Police Commission), [2005] S.J. No. 407, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, June 16, 2005, Hunter J. On December 18, 1999, ...

A teacher (“Kempling”) appealed the decision of the British Columbia Supreme Court dismissing his appeal from a decision of a Hearing Panel of the British Columbia College of Teachers (the “College”) finding him guilty of conduct unbecoming a member of the College, and suspending his teaching certificate for one month. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the court below was not in error in upholding the decision of the Panel. The Court of Appeal held that it was not open for Kempling to raise section 2(a) of the Charter as he had failed to appear before the Panel at the first hearing and laid no evidentiary basis to assess any alleged infringement of his religious freedom.

Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Teachers – Appeals – Evidence – Teachers – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Penalties – Charter of Rights – Freedom of expression – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Correctness Kempling v. British Columbia College ...

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the Edmonton Journal Group (the “Media Intervenors”) were successful in their appeal from the chambers judge’s decision to quash the decision of an inquiry judge granting “interested person” status to the media in a fatality inquiry. The Court of Appeal held that the chambers judge did not appropriately apply the reasonableness standard in reviewing the inquiry judge’s decision and instead substituted his own opinion for that of the inquiry judge.

Administrative law – Freedom of information and protection of privacy – Media access to hearings – Hearings – In camera hearings – Judicial review – Administrative decisions – Appeals – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Remedies – Certiorari Wasylyshen v. Wenden (Appeal by Canadian Broadcasting Corp.), [2005] A.J. No. 710, Alberta Court of Appeal, June 1, ...

The Court allowed an appeal by the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers’ Marketing Board and reinstated a decision of the Respondent’s Appeal Tribunal which had found the Respondent, Stetler, guilty of engaging in the unlawful sale of tobacco outside the auspices of the Board’s quota system. The reviewing judge had erred in failing to properly determine the appropriate standard of review applicable to the Tribunal’s decision and by applying a standard of correctness rather than reasonableness.

Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Marketing Boards – Penalties – Judicial review – Evidence – Witnesses – Bias – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Correctness Stetler v. Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal, [2005] O.J. No. 2817, Ontario Court of Appeal, July 8, 2005, S. Borins, K.N. Feldman and E.A. ...

The Court ordered a re-hearing by the Police Review Board of a complaint against a police officer on the grounds that the Board had permitted inappropriate cross-examination of the Complainant, had failed to give adequate reasons, and had failed to assist the unrepresented Complainant

Administrative law – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Police Commission – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Unrepresented complainant – Judicial review – Evidence – Procedural requirements and fairness – Failure to provide reasons Kelly v. Nova Scotia (Police Commission), [2005] N.S.J. No. 284, Nova Scotia Supreme Court, June 2, 2005, F.C. Edwards ...

The Court of Appeal dismissed the Workers’ Compensation Board’s appeal of a reviewing judge’s decision to uphold a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Commission regarding a Claimant’s entitlement to benefits. The WCB had appealed on the basis that the reviewing judge had failed to apply the correct standard of review.

Administrative law – Workers compensation – Benefits – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Judicial review – Privative clauses – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness – Reasonableness simpliciter Alberta (Workers’ Compensation Board) v. Alberta (Workers’ Compensation Appeals Commission), [2005] A.J. No. 825, Alberta Court of Appeal, July 8, 2005, Hunt, Berger, Costigan JJ.A. ...

The Court of Appeal allowed an appeal from a decision of the Respondent Association’s Appeals Committee which had overturned the Appellant’s acquittal on charges of professional misconduct and substituted a verdict of guilty on some charges. The Court held that the Appeals Committee had misstated and misapplied the reasonableness standard in reviewing the Conduct Committee’s decision.

Administrative law – Nurses – Disciplinary proceedings – Judicial review – Appeals – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Nelson v. Alberta Assn. of Registered Nurses, [2005] A.J. No. 821, Alberta Court of Appeal, June 29, 2005, Hunt, Berger and Costigan JJ.A. The Appellant was a Registered Nurse who, after a ten-day hearing, was acquitted by ...

The Court dismissed an appeal from a decision of the Respondent Institute’s Appeal Tribunal which had decided to refer two allegations of unprofessional conduct to the Discipline Tribunal Roster Chair and not to allow the Appellant to make representations to the Appeal Tribunal. The Court held that, under the Act, it was premature for the Court to hear an appeal at this stage of the proceedings.

Administrative law – Accountants – Disciplinary proceedings – Procedural fairness – Judicial review – Natural justice – Appeal process – Hearings – Conduct of hearings Partington v. Institute of Chartered Accountants of Alberta, [2005] A.J. No. 787, Alberta Court of Appeal, July 4, 2005, Russell and Picard JJ.A. and Ouellette J. The Appellant was a Chartered Accountant ...