Applying administrative law principles Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed insurance arbitrator’s decision was unreasonable

26. October 2016 0
Administrative law – Judicial review – Administrative decisions – Arbitration and award – Unreasonableness – Appeals – Standard of review – Correctness – Reasonableness simpliciter – Evidence Intact insurance Co. v. Allstate Insurance Co. of Canada, [2016] O.J. No. 4113, 2016 ONCA 609, Ontario Court of Appeal, August 4, 2016, R.J. Sharpe, H.S. LaForme and ...

The proper way to attack decisions made by administrative bodies is through judicial review. It is not permissible to circumvent this process by dressing up a review of a decision of an administrative tribunal as an application falling under the rules of civil procedure.

28. August 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative  tribunals – Police Review Board – Police  –  Governance – Criminal records request – Judicial review  –  Administrative decisions –  Jurisdiction of court – Compliance with legislation – Procedural requirements and fairness J.N. v. Durham (Regional Municipality) Police Service, [2012] O.J. No. 2809, 2012 ONCA 428, Ontario Court of ...

The court declined to quash the decision of the Discipline Panel of the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia (the “APEGBC”) which had made a finding of unprofessional conduct on the part of the Appellant as a result of him signing, sealing and submitting structural drawings for a building permit and preparing support design calculations which did not conform to the British Columbia Building Code. The court held that the charge was sufficiently particularized and there was no merit to the allegation that the Panel found misconduct based on elements not enumerated in the charge. While the Respondent did breach a duty to disclose documentation, the Appellant’s right to make full answer and defence was not impaired as a result. It was not unreasonable for the Panel to find that the Appellant demonstrated unprofessional conduct and there was no error in the penalty imposed.

27. July 2007 0
Administrative law – Engineers – Disciplinary proceedings – Competence – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Evidence – Penalties – Suspensions – Judicial review – Administrative decisions – Hearings – Natural justice – Disclosure – Standard of review – Correctness – Reasonableness simpliciter Familamiri v. Assn. of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia, [2004] B.C.J. ...

The Court quashed the Respondent’s decision to deny benefits to the developmentally and intellectually disabled Petitioner. By structuring its decision on an IQ criteria, the Respondent had acted outside of its jurisdiction and had fettered its own discretion.

22. August 2006 0
Administrative law – Administrative decisions – Community Living authority – Legislation – Validity – Ultra vires – Unlawful delegation of power – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation N.F. (Guardian Ad Litem of) v. Community Living B.C., [2006] B.C.J. No. 1331, British Columbia Supreme Court, June 12, 2006, Chamberlist J. The Petitioner was 19 years of ...

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.

23. August 2005 0
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, ...

Professional figure skating coaches (the “Patersons”) brought an application for judicial review of the procedure adopted by Skate Canada which had commenced an investigation into complaints against the Patersons alleging dishonesty, fraudulent misconduct and personal harassment. The court found that the procedures put into place by Skate Canada did not meet the criteria of due process in that the Patersons would not be allowed to cross-examine the complainants. The court granted an order prohibiting Skate Canada from proceeding with the charges against the Patersons until procedures were in place to guarantee fairness.

22. February 2005 0
Administrative law – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Judicial review application – Administrative decisions – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice – Jurisdiction of tribunal Paterson v Skate Canada, [2004] A.J. No. 1542, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, December 22, 2004, Moen J. The Patersons were professional figure skating coaches who moved to Grande ...

The misconduct convictions imposed by the Respondent were upheld on appeal as the Court held that the Panel was not unreasonable in the exercise of its statutory duty. However, the costs award ordered against the Appellant exceeded the bounds of reasonableness and was set aside.

28. December 2004 0
Administrative law – Nurses – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Penalties – Judicial review – Administrative decisions – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Costs Filipchuk v. College of Licensed Practical Nurses of Manitoba, [2004] M.J. No. 367, Manitoba Court of Appeal, September 29, 2004, Twaddle, Kroft and Monnin JJ.A. A statutory ...

A lawyer (“Arsenault”) obtained an order quashing an interim suspension imposed upon him by the Law Society of New Brunswick (the “Law Society”) on the basis that he was not afforded procedural fairness

28. December 2004 0
Administrative law – Barristers and solicitors – Disciplinary proceedings – Penalties – Suspension – Judicial review – Administrative decisions – Procedural requirements and fairness Arsenault v. Law Society of New Brunswick, [2004] N.B.J. No 395, New Brunswick Court of Queen’s Bench, August 10, 2004, Russell J. On May 10, 2004, Arsenault was suspended from practising law ...

J.M.D.’s appeal of the dismissal of her claim for compensation pursuant to the Victims’ Rights and Services Act was allowed by the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal. The court held that the N.S. Utility and Review Board erred in the manner in which it considered and disposed of evidence of a witness tendered as similar fact evidence.

28. December 2004 0
Administrative law – Judicial review – Administrative decisions – Review Board – Evidence – Witnesses – Similar fact evidence admissibility J.M.D. v. Nova Scotia (Utility and Review Board), [2004] N.S.J. No. 400, Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, October 28, 2004, Glube C.J.N.S. J.M.D. claimed that, when she was a nursing student in Halifax in the mid-60s, ...

An application was granted for an order of certiorari to quash a resolution of the Medical Advisory Committee of the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority that suspended the Applicant doctor’s medical staff privileges pending the outcome of a hearing into certain complaints against him. The Applicant’s privileges were re-instituted subject to certain conditions.

28. September 2004 0
Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Competence – Hospital privileges – Suspensions – Hearings – Judicial review – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness – Administrative decisions – Bias – Remedies – Certiorari – Injunctions Fong v. Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, [2004] M.J. No. 299, Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench, July 30, 2004, Beard J. The ...