The appeal by an operator of a coal-fired electricity generator (“Milner”) from a decision of the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (the “Board”) to refuse to investigate or hold a hearing arising from a complaint lodged by Milner was allowed where the complaint had arguable merit

28. September 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Utility and Review Board – Rules and by-laws – Natural resources – Electricity – Loss of electricity – Line Loss Rule – Judicial review – Investigations – Compliance with legislation – Statutory interpretation – Complaints lacking merit – Definition Milner Power Inc. v. Alberta (Energy and Utilities ...

The Court dismissed an appeal by the City of Ottawa which had argued that the Ontario Municipal Board had erred in failing to give deference to the decision of City Council, regarding its rejection of a development proposal. The Court held that section 2.1 of the Planning Act, which required the Board to “have regard to” Council’s decision, suggested that minimal deference was owed to Council’s decision. In the result, the Board did not fail in its duty imposed by section 2.1.

26. January 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Municipal councils – Municipalities – Planning and zoning – Have regard to – definition – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Compliance with legislation Ottawa (City) v. Minto Communities Inc., [2009] O.J. No. 4913, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, November 13, 2009, P.T. ...

The Court of Appeal set aside a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Commission, which had denied the appellant pension benefits, following her estranged husband’s death in a work-related accident, on the basis that the appellant and her child were not “dependants”. The Court of Appeal found that the Commission had failed to apply the correct test with respect to whether the appellant and her child were “dependents”.

27. October 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers Compensation – Benefits – Dependant – definition – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness – Reasonableness simpliciter – Interpretation of legislation – Evidence – Test Elgie v. Alberta (Workers’ Compensation Appeals Commission), [2009] A.J. No. 899, Alberta Court of Appeal, ...

The Appellant Board successfully appealed the decision of the Chambers judge, which had overturned the Board’s review decision that found the Respondent Petro-Canada was not an employer, within the meaning of the Workers’ Compensation Act, in respect of a safety investigation

27. October 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers Compensation – Employer – definition – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Petro-Canada v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Board), [2009] B.C.J. No. 1842, British Columbia Court of Appeal, September 16, 2009, M.V. Newbury, S.D. ...

The appeal by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (“CBC”) from a decision dismissing the CBC’s application for judicial review of a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal (“WCAT”) was dismissed where the Court found that the British Columbia Workers’ Compensation Board (“WCB”) was the appropriate body to determine whether a person engaged by the CBC was an “employee” within the meaning of the Governments Employees Compensation Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. G-5

Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Government agencies – Government employees – Workers compensation – Federal and provincial legislation – Worker – definition – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Jurisdiction of tribunal – Standard of review – Correctness Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. Luo, [2009] B.C.J. No. 1559, British Columbia Court of ...

While the Assistance Appeal Board applied an erroneous analysis of a provision allowing an income support recipient to spend assets for specified purposes, the Court declined to set aside the Assistance Appeal Board’s decision finding, on a standard of review of correctness, that the Board’s conclusion was correct

28. July 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Assistance Appeal Board – Ministerial orders – Benefits – Income assistance – Eligibilty – Basic need – definition – Judicial review – Interpretation of  legislation – Jurisdiction – Standard of review – Correctness Savary v. Nova Scotia (Community Services), [2009] N.S.J. No. 234, 2009 NSSC 123, Nova ...

The standard of review of an adjudicator’s decision made pursuant to the Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1993, S.S. 1993, c. O-1.1, on a point of law, is correctness. Section 27 of the Act which prohibits an employer from taking discriminatory action against a worker applies only as between the employer and the employer’s worker. The section does not apply as between an employer and a person who is a worker on the employer’s worksite but is not employed by the employer but by some other entity.

26. May 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Occupational Health and Safety Officer – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness – Compliance with legislation – Discrimination – Labour relations – Working conditions – Workers compensation – Worker – definition – Employer – definition Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan Inc. v. Oppenlander, [2009] S.J. No. ...

The Court of Appeal allowed an Appeal of a decision of the B.C. Supreme Court, which had found that a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal, that the Appellant was injured in the course of his employment, was patently unreasonable. In making its finding, the Court of Appeal found that the B.C. Legislature had not, by enacting sections 58 and 59 of the Administrative Tribunal’s Act, stepped outside its legislative competence and infringed on a constitutional guarantee of judicial review for the superior courts. Moreover, the effect of the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick was not to change the meaning of patently unreasonable. The application judge, while referring to the correct approach to factual issues, impermissibly weighed the evidence and moved outside the definition of patently unreasonable.

Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers Compensation – Worker – definition – Legislation – Constitutional issues – Ultra vires – Judicial review – Jurisdiction of court – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness – Evidence Manz v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal), [2009] B.C.J. No. 464, British ...

The Petitioners sought judicial review of a decision made by the Worker’s Compensation Appeal Tribunal (the “WCAT”). In the context of that hearing, the Petitioners objected to the submissions entered by the WCAT. The Court upheld the WCAT’s standing to appear and make the submissions it made in the context of the Petition.

Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Practice and procedure – Judicial review application – Standing in judicial review – Workers Compensation – Worker – definition Buttar v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal), [2009] B.C.J. No. 548, British Columbia Supreme Court, January 13, 2009, K.M. Ker J. The Petitioner, ...

The application by Western Forest Products (“WFP”) and the Association of British Columbia Landowners for judicial review of a series of bylaws adopted by the Capital Regional District (“CRD”) was allowed where the court found that the voting on the bylaws did not take place in accordance with the Local Government Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 323 (the “Act”) and, consequently, the bylaws were illegal

24. February 2009 0
Administrative law – Natural resources – Timber licences – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Ministerial – Regional Districts – Municipalities – Planning and zoning – Change of by-laws – Validity – Voting procedures – Cost sharing – Definition – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Correctness Western Forest Products Inc. ...