A senior air traffic controller (“Hudgin”) succeeded in obtaining an order overturning the decision of the Appeal Panel of the Civil Aviation Tribunal which had confirmed a penalty against Hudgin for giving instructions contrary to the applicable standards governing the separation of aircraft on a runway. The court held that Hudgin was not in breach of his statutory duty as the improper direction at issue was actually made by a trainee under the supervision of Hudgin.

Administrative law – Aeronautics – Air traffic controllers – Supervision of trainee – Compliance with legislation – Judicial review – Standard of review – Unreasonableness Hudgin v. Canada (Minister of Transport), [2002] F.C.J. No. 369, Federal Court of Appeal, March 14, 2002, Décary, Sexton and Evans JJ.A. On December 16, 1997, an air traffic controller-trainee at ...

Nexen Inc. (“Nexen”) sought judicial review of the decision of the chief electrical inspector who had refused to issue a permit to Nexen for an extension to its distribution system on the basis that the government utility, SaskPower, had the exclusive right to “supply, transport, distribute and sell” electricity. The court allowed Nexen’s appeal and set aside the decision of the chief inspector holding that the chief inspector had considered circumstances not relevant to the overall purpose of the Act under which he derived his powers, which was related to technical and safety standards, in refusing the permit.

Administrative law – Permits and licences – Compliance with legislation – Inspections – Powers under legislation Nexen Inc. v. Saskatchewan (Chief Electrical Inspector), [2002] S.J. No. 128, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, March 6, 2002, Pritchard J. On August 13, 2001, the chief inspector, appointed by SaskPower pursuant to s. 6 of The Electrical Inspection ...

This is an Application for a Judicial Review of a Direction issued by Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services (the “Commission”) directing the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board (the “Board”) to require Sheila Dunlop to complete the basic recruit training program at the Ontario Police College. On review, the court quashed the direction of the Commission on the basis that the Commission erred in law in finding that the “initial period of training” in the governing legislation mandated completion of the basic recruit training program.

Administrative law – Judicial review application – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Correctness test – Police – Training requirements Ottawa-Carleton (Region) Police Services Board v. Ontario (Civilian Commission on Police Services), [2001] O.J. No. 5498, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, December 14, 2001, Zuber, Matlow and Cusinato JJ. Sheila Dunlop was a member ...