The Applicant sought judicial review of the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission’s refusal to accept a complaint. The court applied a standard of correctness. The Commission’s Certificate was correct and held that the Commission is without jurisdiction to deal with the complaint, which did not concern any ground of discrimination covered by the Act.

24. September 2002 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Jurisdiction – Access to child’s medical records by a divorced parent – Privative clauses – Boards and tribunals – Breach of procedural fairness – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness – Jurisdiction of court G.S. v. Alberta (Human Rights and Citizenship Commission), [2002] A.J. No. 980, Alberta Queen’s Bench, July ...

The Plaintiff’s claim for damages arising out of the Defendant’s delivery of an investigation report to the professional association to which she belonged were dismissed. The Defendants were found to have acted in good faith and their actions were protected by absolute privilege.

24. September 2002 0
Administrative law – Accountants – Disciplinary proceedings – Investigative bodies – Powers – Jurisdiction – Qualified privilege Hung v. Gardiner, [2002] B.C.J. No. 1918, British Columbia Supreme Court, August 21, 2002, Joyce J. Following an investigation of the Plaintiff’s supervising chartered accountant, the Professional Conduct Enquiry Committee (“PCEC”) of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of British ...

A number of adjoining landowners had successfully sought review of a Minister’s order granting an expansion of a landfill before the court. The Court of Appeal reversed the chambers judge’s decision and determined that a Minister’s order was not patently unreasonable and the failure to provide reasons in these circumstances did not constitute a breach of procedural fairness.

24. September 2002 0
Administrative law – Environmental hearings – Judicial review – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness – Breach of procedural fairness – Failure to provide reasons Fenske (c.o.b. Glomick Farms) v. Alberta (Minister of Environment), [2002] A.J. No. 823, Alberta Court of Appeal, June 25, 2002, Berger, Costigan and Paperny, JJ.A. The Beaver Waste Management Services Commission ...

The Corporation of Schreiber and concerned residents brought an application seeking judicial review of a decision by the local School Board to close a high school located in the town. The court dismissed the application for judicial review holding that the Applicants had not met the burden of establishing that the Board had committed a procedural error in reaching its decision to close the school that was so fundamental that it affected the basis of the Board’s decision.

24. September 2002 0
Administrative law – Schools – Closures – School boards – Jurisdiction – Boards and tribunals – Procedural fairness – Judicial review application Schreiber (Township) v. Superior Greenstone District School Board, [2002] O.J. No. 3303, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Divisional Court – Thunder Bay, Ontario, August 23, 2002, Kozak J. Lake Superior High School has two campuses, one ...

The Yukon Medical Council (the “Council”) was successful in its appeal from a decision holding it to be “an agent of the government of the Yukon” and, therefore, subject to the jurisdiction of the Privacy Commissioner. The Court of Appeal held that the Council was free from interference or control by the Yukon government in the exercise of its powers and, therefore, could not be said to be a “public body” within the meaning of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, S.Y. 1995, c. 1.

24. September 2002 0
Administrative law – Freedom of information and protection of privacy – Privacy Commissioner – Jurisdiction – Public body – Definition – Physicians and surgeons – Governance Yukon Medical Council v. Yukon (Information and Privacy Commission), [2002] Y.J. No. 82, Yukon Territory Court of Appeal, August 20, 2002, Finch C.J.Y.T., Donald and Low JJ.A. The Council appealed the ...

A Referee (“Sargeant”) hearing a claim under the Employment Standards Act decided that he was not entitled to consider a limitation period issue in a claim by an employee (“Halloran”) against his former employer with respect to a compensation package offered upon Halloran’s termination. The Referee’s decision was overturned by the Divisional Court. On appeal, the Court of Appeal held that it was unconscionable for the company to invoke a limitation period to deny Halloran’s claim as there had been a fraudulent concealment of the existence of a cause of action against the company.

24. September 2002 0
Administrative law – Employment standards – Employer’s representations – Termination package – Fraudulent concealment – Judicial review – Standard of review – Patently unreasonable decision – Limitations Halloran v. Sargeant, [2002] O.J. No. 3248, Ontario Court of Appeal, August 27, 2002, McMurtry C.J.O., Weiler and Armstrong JJ.A. Halloran was employed by Crown Cork & Seal for 31 ...

A lawyer (“Pierce”) sought a stay of the penalty arising out of a disciplinary action pending his appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. The penalty included a suspension, an order to pay costs, and publication of the penalty. The Court of Appeal granted the stay but only with respect to the suspension as it found that Pierce would suffer irreparable harm if the suspension were instituted and Pierce ultimately succeeded in his appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.

24. September 2002 0
Administrative law – Barristers and solicitors – Disciplinary proceedings – Penalties – Suspension – Stay of suspension Pierce v. Law Society of British Columbia, [2002] B.C.J. No. 2008, British Columbia Court of Appeal, September 5, 2002, Donald J.A. On September 16, 2002, the Law Society issued a citation alleging professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a ...

Parents of children attending a French Immersion school failed in their application seeking to overturn a decision to close the school, as the court found that the school board did not breach its duty of procedural fairness in deciding to close the school

27. August 2002 0
Administrative law – Schools – Closures – School boards – Jurisdiction – Boards and tribunals – Procedural fairness MacGregor v. Halifax Regional School Board, [2002] N.S.J. No. 334, Nova Scotia Supreme Court, July 17, 2002, Coughlan J. The school board voted to close École Beaufort, a school providing French immersion education. The Applicants, parents of children attending ...

An accountant {“Walman”) was the subject of disciplinary proceedings by his professional association. Findings of misconduct by the Association were appealed by Walman and eventually overturned. Walman brought an action for abuse of public office against the Association and certain employees which was dismissed as the court found that the evidence did not support an inference that the Association’s auditors recklessly exceeded their powers in the disciplinary hearings.

27. August 2002 0
Administrative law – Accountants – Disciplinary proceedings – Investigative bodies – Jurisdiction – Powers – Abuse of public office Walman v. Certified General Accountants Assn. of British Columbia, [2002] B.C.J. No. 1560, British Columbia Supreme Court, July 8, 2002, Curtis J. Walman was an accountant who became the subject of disciplinary proceedings brought by the Certified General ...

The Lax Kw’alaams Indian Band (the “Band”) brought an application seeking to set aside a permit issued by the Minister of Sustainable Resource Management and a declaration that the Minister owed a duty to the Band to consult with them prior to granting such a permit. The court found that the Minister had an obligation to consult and accommodate the Band with respect to the permit but dismissed the Petition on the basis that there was no evidence that such consultation and accommodation had not occurred in this instance.

27. August 2002 0
Administrative law – Logging permits – Aboriginal issues – Government’s duty to consult – Procedural requirements – Natural justice Lax Kw’alaams Indian Band v. British Columbia (Minister of Sustainable Resource Management), [2002] B.C.J. No. 1699, British Columbia Supreme Court, July 19, 2002, Maczko J. On April 30, 2002, the Minister of Sustainable Resource Management (the ...