A medical doctor appealed from the decision of an Inquiry Committee finding him guilty of infamous conduct and suspending him from the practice of medicine. The court refused to interfere with the Committee’s finding on credibility and the appeal was not allowed. In reviewing the Committee’s decision on penalty, the court took a deferential approach and did not overturn the ruling of the highly specialized tribunal.

28. January 2003 0
Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Inquiry committee decisions – Fairness – Evidence – Sentencing – Judicial review – Appeal process – Scope of appeal M.M. v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia, [2002] B.C.J. No. 2833, British Columbia Supreme Court, November 4, 2002, Bauman J. M.M., a medical doctor, ...

A customer of Airgas Canada Inc. complained that an employee of Airgas, Mr. Fuggle, had placed graffiti at their premises. As a result of the complaint Mr. Fuggle was dismissed by Airgas. Mr. Fuggle submitted a claim to the Director of Employment Standards requesting a determination that he had been dismissed without cause. The Director of Employment Standards concluded that Airgas had just cause to terminate Mr. Fuggle’s employment. Mr. Fuggle’s appeal to the Employment Standards Tribunal was dismissed. Prior to receiving this decision Mr. Fuggle commenced an action in the Supreme Court alleging that he was wrongfully dismissed. Airgas applied pursuant to rule 18A of the Rules of Court for an Order that the claim be dismissed on the basis that there had already been a final determination of the issues between the parties under the Employment Standards Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 113 (“Standards Act”). In dismissing the application the Court exercised its discretion to refuse to apply estoppel.

28. January 2003 0
Administrative law – Employment standards – Termination of employment – Just cause – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Issue estoppel – Discretion of court Fuggle v. Airgas Canada Inc., [2002] B.C.J. No. 2800, British Columbia Supreme Court, December 11, 2002, Burnyeat J. Airgas Canada Inc. applied to the court pursuant to Rule 18A for an order ...

Detective Robertson, an Edmonton police officer, was the subject of several citations related to his activities while on the police force. During proceedings, Detective Robertson applied to the court for a stay on the grounds that natural justice required that he be provided with funded counsel due to the complexity of the citations. The application to the court failed.

24. December 2002 0
Administrative law – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Stay of proceedings – Right to legal representation – Judicial review – Breach of procedural fairness Robertson v. Edmonton (City) Police Service, [2002] A.J. No. 1366, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, November 6, 2002, Clackson J. Fifteen citations were launched against Detective Robertson (the “Applicant”) by the Edmonton ...

A teacher applied for judicial review of a hearing committee’s decision of professional misconduct. The Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench dismissed the case; however, the Alberta Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and set aside the findings of professional misconduct concluding that the decision of the hearing committee was unreasonable and improper.

24. December 2002 0
Administrative law – Teachers – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Schools – Parental rights Eggertson v. Alberta Teachers’ Assn., [2002] A.J. No. 1358, Alberta Court of Appeal, November 5, 2002, O’Leary, Costigan and Paperny JJ.A. The Appellant was a teacher with the Calgary ...

An appeal by a registered nurse from a decision of the Appeal Committee of the Registered Nurses Association of Nova Scotia to dismiss his appeal from a decision of the Professional Conduct Committee which found that he was guilty of professional misconduct and revoked his licence. The appeal was based on several grounds including alleged procedural and fairness violations. The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

24. December 2002 0
Administrative law – Nurses – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Investigative bodies – Fairness – Role of legal counsel – Judicial review – Breach of procedural fairness Fox v. Registered Nurses’ Assn. of Nova Scotia, [2002] N.S.J. No. 486, Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, November 13, 2002, Roscoe, Chipman and Bateman JJ.A. Mr. Fox was employed ...

Ms. Cromie was issued a 24-hour driving prohibition after providing a breath sample to a police officer. On the same day, Ms. Cromie was served with a notice of driving prohibition pursuant to section 94.1 of the Motor Vehicle Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 318. The adjudicator confirmed the driving prohibition against Ms. Cromie and Ms. Cromie appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that she had a right to cross-examine the arresting officer in front of the adjudicator. Ms. Cromie’s application for judicial review was dismissed.

24. December 2002 0
Administrative law – Judicial review application – Breach of procedural fairness – Motor vehicles – Suspension of driver’s licence – Adjudication – Right to cross-examine arresting officer Cromie v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles), [2002] B.C.J. No. 2552, British Columbia Supreme Court, October 4, 2002, Melnick J. On April 6, 2002, Ms. Cromie was pulled ...

Actions taken by the Legislative Assembly relating to the tenure of an official appointed to carry out statutory duties attracted a duty of fairness. The Conflict of Interest Commissioner (the “Conflict Commissioner”), whose appointment was revoked by Commissioner of the Northwest Territories on the recommendation of the Legislative Assembly, was owed a duty of procedural fairness which included, at a minimum, the obligation to put her on notice that her position was at risk and to give her the right to be heard. The removal from office of the Conflict Commissioner was not an aspect of the Legislative Assembly’s privilege.

26. November 2002 0
Administrative law – Legislative assembly – Executive officers – Duty of fairness – Official appointments – Judicial review – Procedural requirements Roberts v. Northwest Territories (Commissioner), [2002] N.W.T.J. No. 81, Northwest Territories Supreme Court, October 23, 2002, Vertes J. The appointment of the Conflict Commissioner was for a four-year term. Fifteen months into her tenure, the Legislative ...

The Petitioner, British Columbia Chicken Marketing Board (the “Chicken Board”), sought an injunction requiring the Respondent Reid, an organic chicken producer, to cease production of chicken until he had received a grower’s licence and permit from the Chicken Board. The Court granted the injunction, finding that there was nothing in the legislative scheme to exclude organically grown chicken from the reach of the Chicken Board. Certified organic chicken is chicken.

26. November 2002 0
Administrative law – Permits and licences – Compliance with legislation – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Remedies – Injunctions British Columbia (Chicken Marketing Board) v. Reid, [2002] B.C.J. No. 2403, British Columbia Supreme Court, October 24, 2002, C.L. Smith J. The Petitioner Chicken Board is one of a number of marketing boards established for various ...

A university professor complained that he had been discriminated against under the Universities Academic Pension Plan on the basis of gender as the pension plan provided less of a monthly pension benefit to a married male employee and his spouse than a married female employee and her spouse where the employees and their spouses are of the same age and where the employees have made the same contributions to the Plan over the same length of time. The Chief Commissioner of the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission (the “Commissioner”) dismissed the complaint as being “without merit”. The standard of review with respect to the Commissioner’s decision on legal issues or matters of mixed fact and law is that of correctness while the standard for factual findings is reasonableness simpliciter. The Commissioner’s conclusion that the complaint was “without merit” was unreasonable. The Commissioner’s function is that of a gatekeeper. His role is to determine if there is sufficient evidence to justify passing a complaint on to a human rights panel. In this case, there was sufficient basis in the evidence that the Commissioner ought to have advanced this matter to the next stage.

26. November 2002 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Gender – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness – Reasonableness simpliciter Mis v. Alberta (Human Rights and Citizenship Commission), [2002] A.J. No. 1320, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, October 29, 2002, Lee J. The applicant university professor sought to set aside a decision of the ...

A journalist made a request under the Act Respecting Access to Documents Held by Public Bodies and the Protection of Personal Information, R.S.Q., c. A-2.1 (the “Act”) for access to a document concerning the expenses of Members of the National Assembly which described the Member’s total payroll and expenses for employing staff and paying for professional services. The Commission d’accès à l’information (the “Commissioner”) refused disclosure of the information under ss. 34 and 57 of the Act; finding that the requested document had been prepared “for” a Member and could not be disclosed under s. 34 without the Member’s consent and that the Member could not be considered to constitute a public body within the meaning of s. 57.

26. November 2002 0
Administrative law – Access to information – Production of records – Public body – Definition – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Macdonell v. Quebec (Commission d’accès à l’information), [2002] S.C.J. No. 71, Supreme Court of Canada, November 1, 2002, McLachlin C.J., L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie, Arbour and LeBel JJ. A journalist ...