Motion by Associate Chief Justice Douglas for stay of Canadian Judicial Council’s evidentiary decision pending judicial review

27. January 2015 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Canadian Judicial Council – Judges – Professional governance and discipline – Investigations – Public interest – Judicial review – Stay of proceedings – interlocutory – Disclosure of records – Evidence – admissibility Douglas v. Canada (Attorney General), [2014] F.C.J. No. 1149, 2014 FC 1115, Federal Court, November ...

The New Brunswick Court of Queen’s Bench dismissed the applicant physician’s judicial review application regarding a preliminary decision made by the College of Physicians and Surgeons. The Court declined to exercise its supervisory jurisdiction over the matter since it found that the complainant had adequate alternative remedies available to him under the Medical Act and failed to exhaust those before seeking judicial review. In respect of an evidentiary issue that was raised at the outset, the Court ruled that letters of complaint from patients underlying the proceedings between the College and the physician were inadmissible in the judicial review record because they were protected by privacy and privilege as per section 71.2(2) of the Medical Act.

25. November 2014 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Physicians and Surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice – Compliance with legislation – Evidence – admissibility – Remedies – Alternative remedies Cockeram v. College of Physicians ...

Appeal from a decision of Winnipeg Taxicab Board refusing to reinstate licence on the basis of hearsay evidence and opinion evidence as to credibility

22. July 2014 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Taxi licence appeal board – Permits and licences – Investigations – Judicial review – Hearsay Evidence – admissibility – Credibility – Natural justice – Failure to provide reasons Gidda v. Taxicab Board, [2014] M.J. No. 160, 2014 MBCA 58, Manitoba Court of Appeal, June 6, 2014, H.C. ...

The Court quashed part of the Health Professions Review Board’s decision to return a complaint matter to the Inquiry Committee, including all of the additional documents submitted by the complainant as new evidence. An adjudicator previously assigned to the case at the Review Board had already decided that only 5 of the 9 additional documents were admissible. Thus, the part of the Review Board’s decision which directed the Inquiry Committee to consider all 9 of the additional documents was quashed. The petitioner had also made an application for the use of pseudonyms in the case, and the sealing of the file. The Court dismissed the application because the petition did not involve any extraordinarily sensitive personal information and disclosure would not undermine the purpose of the petition.

22. April 2014 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Health Professions Review Board – Physicians and Surgeons – Competence – Judicial review – Jurisdiction of tribunal – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence – Fresh evidence – Admissibility – Publication ban JC v. Health Professions Review Board, [2014] B.C.J. No. 404, 2014 BCSC 372, British Columbia ...

Court of Appeal overturned the decision of a chambers judge and upheld a decision of the BC Human Rights Tribunal awarding a mentally disabled appellant damages for discrimination in tenancy. The appellant had purchased a motor home and the respondent had refused to rent the pad on which the home was located and refused to consent to the vendors’ lease to the appellant.

27. August 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Landlord and tenant – Leases – Human rights complaints – Disability – Discrimination – Judicial review – Privileged communications – Disclosure – Evidence – admissibility – Judicial notice Silver Campsites Ltd. v. James, [2013] B.C.J. No. 1302, 2013 BCCA 292, British Columbia Court ...

This case concerned an employee who sustained a workplace injury and was granted a 5% permanent medical impairment as a result. Over twenty years later, additional medical information indicated that the employee’s injuries were more severe than originally appreciated. The employee thus sought a reconsideration of his original claim and an increase to his permanent medical impairment. The tribunal would not reconsider the original claim. The Court remitted the decision back to the tribunal for reconsideration. The Court found that the tribunal erred in its consideration of the criteria for new evidence, for reconsideration purposes, and summarized the appropriate test for the introduction of new evidence for reconsideration purposes.

28. February 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Benefits – Judicial review –  Evidence – Fresh evidence – admissibility Drake v. Nova Scotia (Workers’ Compensation Appeals Tribunal), [2012] N.S.J. No. 25, 2012 NSCA 6, Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, January 23, 2012, J.E. Fichaud, D.R. Beveridge and D.P.S. Farrar JJ.A. The ...

The Alberta Court of Appeal held that the Energy Resources Conservation Board’s decision to reject expert evidence submitted after the deadline was a proper exercise of its discretion under the Energy Resources Conservation Act

28. June 2011 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Energy Resources Conservation Board – Environmental matters – Oil wells – Protections of species – Evidence – Expert reports – Admissibility – Appeals – Leave to appeal – review – Jurisdiction – Procedural requirements and fairness – Failure to provide reasons – Standard of review – Correctness ...

Dr. Marvin Sazant (“Dr. Sazant”) was unsuccessful on appeal from an interim and final decisions of the Discipline Committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (“the College”) that had revoked his licence to practice medicine, and ordered costs against him for professional misconduct arising out of historical sexual conduct with three young males

29. March 2011 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Investigations – Powers of investigator – Physicians and surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Sexual relations with patients – Penalties – Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Search and seizure – Remedies – Charter relief – Availability – Legislation – Ultra vires ...

The Appellant Police Officers unsuccessfully appealed the decision of the British Columbia Supreme Court, which had dismissed the Officers’ petitions for judicial review of a decision of the Respondent Commissioner. The Respondent Commissioner had rejected the Officers’ applications to quash Notices of Misconduct issued to the Officers.

23. March 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Commission of Inquiry – Investigations – Jurisdiction to issue a complaint – Police – Royal Canadian Mounted Police – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Judicial review – Fresh evidence – admissibility – Standard of review – Correctness – Reasonableness simpliciter – Procedural requirements and fairness Canada ...

The Applicant Tenant (the “Tenant”) succeeded on an application for judicial review in respect of a decision made by one of the Residential Tenancy Office’s Dispute Resolution Officers (the “DRO”). The DRO had decided the Tenant was properly evicted for cause by the Respondent Landlord.

23. March 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Residential Tenancy office – Landlord and tenant – Eviction – Conduct of tenant – Illegal activities – Criminal charges – Evidence – admissibility – past conduct – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness Williams v. Holywell Properties, [2009] B.C.J. No. ...