The applicant was successful in seeking a judicial review order on the basis that the Canadian Human Rights Commission (“Commission”) did not conduct a sufficient/neutral investigation as it ignored crucial evidence and did not address several critical aspects of the applicant’s claim

23. November 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Investigations – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Age – Employment law – Appointment – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Bias – Evidence Hughes v. Canada (Attorney General), [2010] F.C.J. No. 1193, 2010 FC 963, Federal Court, September 27, 2010, ...

An investigation conducted by the Canadian Human Rights Commission did not meet the standard of thoroughness and was remitted back to the Commission for reconsideration

26. October 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Human Rights complaints – Discrimination – Disability – Employment law – Appointment – Judicial review – Investigations – Procedural requirements and fairness – Bias Hughes v. Canada (Attorney General), [2010] F.C.J. No. 1036, 2010 FC 837, Federal Court, August 23, 2010, Mactavish J. ...

Upon judicial review, the court quashed a decision made by the Inquiry Committee of the British Columbia Veterinary Medical Association on the grounds that it committed a breach of procedural fairness by declining to consider the petitioner’s argument about institutional bias

24. August 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Veterinary Associations – Veterinarians – Disciplinary proceedings – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Bias – Jurisdiction – Standard of review – Correctness Bajwa v. British Columbia Veterinary Medical Assn., [2010] B.C.J. No. 1169, 2010 BCSC 848, British Columbia Supreme Court, June 16, 2010, M.J. ...

The originating application of the Citizens’ Representative, Newfoundland and Labrador, was struck down for failing to disclose a cause of action where the relief sought was a declaration that the Citizens’ Representative was in a conflict of interest and that there was a reasonable apprehension of bias such that he should be dismissed from his position. His spouse was the CEO of the health authority in respect of which the Citizens’ Representative had received a request to investigate issues around mental health services delivery by that health authority.

27. July 2010 0
Administrative law – Investigations – Ombudsman – Cititzens’ Representative – Conflict of interest – Judicial review – Bias – Compliance with legislation – Jurisdiction of court – Legislative Assembly – Official appointments – Remedies – Certiorari – Practice and procedure – Parties – Standing – No reasonable cause of action Burry v. Newfoundland and Labrador ...

The Applicant (“Dr. Khan”) unsuccessfully brought an application for judicial review in respect of a recommendation made by the Respondent Hospital’s Executive Committee of the Board of Directors (the “Committee”). The Committee recommended that Dr. Khan’s hospital privileges be terminated.

23. March 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Hospital Appeal Board – Physicians and surgeons – Hospital privileges – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Bias – Judicial review application – Striking out – Premature – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Jurisdiction Khan v. Scarborough General Hospital, [2009} O.J. No. 5437, Ontario Superior ...

The Court of Appeal considered whether the Discipline Committee of the Law Society of Manitoba had erred in finding the Appellant guilty of conduct unbecoming a lawyer for swearing at a member of a tribunal and, as a consequence, imposing a restriction on the Appellant’s practicing certificate to address its concerns as to her psychological fitness to practice law. The Court dismissed the Appellant’s conviction appeal, in which she alleged an apprehension of bias on the part of the panel, but allowed her sentence appeal, in part, on the basis that the panel improperly considered issues of competency or ungovernability which were not the subject of the citation before it.

23. March 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Law Societies – Barristers and solicitors – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Penalties and Suspensions – Judicial review – Bias – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Ritchot v. Law Society of Manitoba, [2010] M.J. No. 28, 2010 MBCA 13, Manitoba Court of ...

The appeal of a nursing home (“Grass Home”) from the decision of a fire marshal affirming an order of a fire inspector requiring the removal of locks was allowed where the Court found the fire marshal’s decision was reasonable but void due to an apprehension of bias

23. February 2010 0
Administrative law – Municipalities – Fire inspectors – Orders – Judicial review – Decisions reviewed – Fire inspectors – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Bias – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Grass Home Ltd. v. New Brunswick (Provincial Fire Marshall), [2009] N.B.J. No. 381, New Brunswick Court of Queen’s Bench, September ...

The Appellant Hearing Aid Practitioner, Gedge, unsuccessfully appealed the decision of the Respondent Board, which penalized him for some of his conduct as a hearing aid practitioner

25. August 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Hearing Aid Practitioners Board – Hearing Aid Practitioners – Disciplinary proceedings – Penalties and Suspensions – Competence – Public interest – Judicial review – Self-governing professions – Jurisdiction – Compliance with legislation – Procedural requirements and fairness – Bias Gedge v. Hearing Aid Practitioners Board, [2009] N.J. ...

The Application by a Claimant (“Rowel”) for judicial review of a decision of the Manitoba Human Rights Commission (the “Commission”) was dismissed where the Court found that the investigation into Rowel’s complaint was conducted neutrally and thoroughly

28. July 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Human rights complaints – Disability – Duty to accommodate – Investigations – Role of Investigator – Procedural fairness – Judicial review – Bias – Failure to provide reasons Rowel v. Union Centre Inc., [2009] M.J. No. 215, Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench, May ...

The application by a cosmetic surgeon (“Yazdanfar”) for judicial review of an Interim Order of the Executive Committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario was dismissed where the Court found there was an ample factual foundation for the Committee to significantly limit Yazdanfar’s performance of liposuction and breast augmentation surgery pending a Disciplinary Hearing

28. July 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Physicians and Surgeons – Investigations – Failure to produce records – Statutory provisions – Disciplinary proceedings – Competence – Penalties and suspensions – Public interest – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter ...