A standard of correctness applies to an appeal from a chambers judge’s decision on a standard of review to be applied to a tribunal’s decision. The appellate court is in the same position as the reviewing judge. In this case, the chambers judge erred in concluding that a standard of reasonableness simpliciter applied to the tribunal and the appeal was allowed.

22. October 2002 0
Administrative law – Judicial review – Standard of review of appellate court – Correctness test – Not patently unreasonable Alberta (Minister of Municipal Affairs) v. Telus Communications Inc., [2002] A.J. No. 1068, Alberta Court of Appeal, September 4, 2002, Berger, O’Leary and Hunt JJ.A. The Municipal Government Board (“MGB”) determined that feature software used in ...

Stinchcombe succeeded in his appeal of the decision allowing the Law Society of Alberta to proceed with two charges against him relating to events occurring in 1986 and 1987. The Court held that Stinchcombe’s ability to defend the charges had been prejudiced by the Law Society’s inordinate and inexcusable delay and that this constituted a denial of natural justice.

28. May 2002 0
Administrative law – Barristers and solicitors – Disciplinary proceedings – Boards and tribunals – Jurisdiction – Natural justice – Delay – Hearings – Disclosure – Judicial review – Standard of review- Correctness test Stinchcombe v. Law Society of Alberta, [2002] A.J. No. 544, Alberta Court of Appeal, April 26, 2002, Conrad, O’Leary and Paperny JJ.A. On ...

Butterworth failed in his application seeking a stay of his disciplinary hearing before a committee of the College of Veterinarians of Ontario where the court found that prospective damage to Butterworth’s personal and professional reputation did not constitute “irreparable harm”

23. April 2002 0
Administrative law – Veterinarians – Disciplinary proceedings – Stay of proceedings – Jurisdiction – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness test Butterworth v. College of Veterinarians of Ontario, [2001] O.J. No. 5265, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, August 10, 2001, MacFarland J. Butterworth, a veterinarian, was scheduled to have his case heard before a ...

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.

23. April 2002 0
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 ...

A police constable’s application for certiorari of Chair of the Scotia Police Review Board to extend time to complete an investigation was dismissed. Correctness is the standard of review for interpreting the regulation as permitting an extension after the investigation was complete. Patent unreasonableness is the standard respecting his findings and exercise of discretion in granting the extension.

26. March 2002 0
Administrative law – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness test – Patent unreasonableness – Questions of jurisdiction – Extension of time – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Privative clauses Symington v. Halifax (Regional Municipality) Police Service, [2002] N.S.J. No. 112, Nova Scotia Supreme Court, February 8, 2002, Moir J. Constable Symington was the subject ...

The Information Commissioner issued two subpoenas compelling the Deputy Minister of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration (the “CIC”) to produce records. The Attorney General’s application to set aside the subpoenas was granted on jurisdictional basis.

26. March 2002 0
Administrative law – Judicial review – Standard of review – Questions of jurisdiction – Correctness test – Access to information – Production of records – Extension of time – Investigative bodies – Powers Canada (Attorney General) v. Canada (Information Commissioner), [2002] F.C.J. No. 177, Federal Court of Canada – Trial Division, February 6, 2002, Kelen, J. In ...

The Applicant, the Ontario Conference of Judges (the “Association”), sought an order quashing and setting aside the decision of the Respondent (Government of Ontario), which rejected and failed to implement recommendations of the remuneration commission. The application was dismissed. The Court held that the decision of the Respondent met the “rationality test”.

26. March 2002 0
Administrative law – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness test – Simple rationality – Remuneration of judges Ontario Judges Association v. Ontario (Chair, Management Board), [2002] O.J. No. 533, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, February 15, 2002, O’Driscoll, Then and Dunnet, JJ. The Fourth Triennial Remuneration Commission (the “Commission”) was established to review the ...