The Minister of Health Planning was successful in overturning a portion of the remedy aspect of a decision of the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal directing the Minister to amend the birth registration form to provide an option of identifying as a parent, a non-biological parent who is the co-parent of a mother or a father. The court found that the Human Rights Tribunal was within its jurisdiction to Order that the Minister cease discriminating against same gender parents but exceeded its jurisdiction in directing that the Minister take specific steps with respect to altering the birth registration form.

23. September 2003 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Jurisdiction – Remedies – Declaratory relief – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Sexual orientation – Gender – Parent – definition – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness British Columbia (Minister of Health Planning) v. British Columbia (Human Rights Tribunal), [2003] B.C.J. No. 17552, British ...

Dr. Anstead was unsuccessful in his application for a judicial review of the decision of the executive committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan appointing a competency committee. The court held that Dr. Anstead failed to establish that the committee conducting the assessment had violated confidentiality requirements of the by-laws or otherwise exceeded its jurisdiction in reporting its concerns to the College.

23. September 2003 0
Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Governance – Competence committee – Confidentiality of findings – Jurisdiction – Public interest – Judicial review application Anstead v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan, [2003] S.J. No. 463, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, May 26, 2003, G.A. Smith J. Anstead was a registered physician with the College ...

The Workers’ Compensation Commission was unsuccessful in appealing a decision of the Trial Division which had overturned a decision of one of the Commission’s internal review specialists relating to whether or not the Commission was entitled to maintain a subrogated action. The Court of Appeal found that the decision of the internal review specialist was patently unreasonable as it resulted from an inappropriate approach to statutory interpretation.

23. September 2003 0
Administrative law – Workers compensation – Subrogated actions – Administrative decisions – Statutory provisions – Use – Definition – Statutory interpretation vs. judicial interpretation – Judicial review application – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Warford v. Weir’s Construction Ltd., [2003] N.J. No. 178, Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court – Court of Appeal, July 17, 2003, Cameron, ...

Gill was successful in having the Court of Appeal set aside the decision of the B.C. Securities Commission that the newly formed CDNX stock exchange had jurisdiction to discipline Gill for alleged breaches of the rules of the Vancouver Stock Exchange, a predecessor to the CDNX

23. September 2003 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Securities Commission – Compliance with rules and by-laws – Jurisdiction – Stock brokers – Disciplinary proceedings – Governance – Restructuring of stock exchanges – Survival of contracts – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness Gill v. Canadian Venture Exchange Inc., [2003] B.C.J. No. 1767, British Columbia Court ...

A psychiatric nurse (“Bennet”) was successful in his appeal from a decision of the Discipline Committee of the Registered Psychiatric Nurses’ Association of Manitoba (the “Association”). The court found that the Committee’s decision finding Bennet guilty of professional misconduct for having sexual intercourse with a former client was not reasonable as the Committee did not have sufficient evidence before it on the threshold issue of boundaries and/or therapeutic relationships.

Administrative law – Psychiatric Nurses – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Sexual relations with former patient – Boundaries and therapeutic relationships – Judicial review – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Evidence Bennet v. Registered Psychiatric Nurses’ Assn. of Manitoba, [2003] M.J. No. 163, Manitoba Court of Appeal, May 15, 2003, Monnin, Hamilton ...

Bell brought a motion before a panel of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, which had been convened to hear complaints filed against Bell by female employees. Bell alleged that the Tribunal’s independence and impartiality were compromised by two powers: first, the power of the Canadian Human Rights Commission to issue guidelines that are binding on the Tribunal concerning “a class of cases”, and second, the power of the Tribunal Chairperson to extend Tribunal members’ terms in ongoing inquiries.

26. August 2003 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Human Rights Tribunal – Impartiality – Judicial review – Procedural requirements – Reasonable apprehension of bias Bell Canada v. Canadian Telephone Employees Assn., [2003] S.C.J. No. 36, Supreme Court of Canada, June 26, 2003, McLachlin C.J. and Gonthier, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie, Arbour, LeBel ...

A Registrar of the Chiropractors Association was charged with breaching the Chiropractic Act, R.S.M. 1980, c. 100 (“the Act”). An Inquiry Committee dismissed the charges and the Association sought judicial review. A Queen’s Bench judge concluded that the Inquiry Committee was bound as a matter of law by the Regulation to find Dr. Alevizos guilty of professional misconduct and the Respondent appealed to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal held that absent express statutory provision, the final decision of a committee of a professional association properly empowered to make such a decision is not reviewable by the court on an application by the Association or its governing body. The appeal was therefore allowed.

26. August 2003 0
Administrative law – Chiropractors – Governance of professional association – Jurisdiction – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Right of appeal of professional association Manitoba Chiropractors Assn. v. Alevizos, [2003] M.J. No. 206, Manitoba Court of Appeal, June 9, 2003, Twaddle, Monnin and Freedman JJ.A. The ...

An automotive sales and service business (“White Bear”) went into receivership and several of the company’s terminated employees filed complaints with the Labour Services offices of the Government of the Northwest Territories. The employees claimed wages owed and related benefits. An officer of the Labour Standards Board (the “Board”) examined their claims and issued certificates determining the amounts owing and declared that the employees were entitled to wage claims from the officers and directors of White Bear, pursuant to section 62 of the Labour Standards Act. The directors of White Bear appealed the ruling. The Board confirmed the certificates of the officer. The directors then unsuccessfully appealed those confirmations to the Northwest Territories Supreme Court.

26. August 2003 0
Administrative law – Labour Relations Board – Employment standards – Termination of employment – Termination package – Judicial review – Administrative decisions – Failure to provide reasons – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Buist v. Northwest Territories (Labour Standards Board), [2003] N.W.T.J. No. 30, Northwest Territories Supreme Court, May 30, 2003, O’Connor J. The Appellants ...

An aviation company operating tourist flights (“Delco”) was charged with (i) landing or taking off an aircraft in a built-up area of a city or town without authorization, and (ii) the use of Class F Special Use Restricted Airspace. The Appeal Panel of the Civil Aviation Tribunal held that the two sets of charges were founded upon the same acts and that, due to the legal nexus between the counts, Delco had been placed in a position of double jeopardy. The Appeal Panel stayed two of the charges. The Ministry appealed to the Federal Court who held that a legal double jeopardy only exists if there are no additional and distinguishing elements between two charges. Although arising from the same transaction, the Act created separate and distinct offences as a “built up area” is not necessarily “Class F Airspace” and vice versa. The decision of the Appeal Panel was quashed and the decision of the Tribunal member was reinstated.

26. August 2003 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Civil Aviation Tribunal – Penalties – Double jeopardy – Kienapple rule – Judicial review application – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Correctness Canada (Minister of Transport) v. Delco Aviation Ltd., [2002] F.C.J. No. 938, Federal Court of Canada – Trial Division, June 12, 2003, Blanchard ...

Devlin successfully appealed the decision of the Licence Appeal Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) which upheld a decision of the Registrar of Motor Vehicles (the “Registrar”) suspending Devlin’s driver’s licence pursuant to section 47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8 for medical reasons.

26. August 2003 0
Administrative law – Motor vehicles – Suspension of driver’s licence – Medical condition – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Medical Advisory Committee – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness Devlin v. Ontario (Registrar of Motor Vehicles), [2003] O.J. No. 2012, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, May 26, 2003, Pitt J. Devlin had experienced a single ...