An employer’s appeal of a decision of the Nova Scotia Workers Compensation Appeals Tribunal (“WCAT”) was dismissed when the court found there was evidence to support the WCAT’s conclusion that an intense meeting with a supervisor was a “traumatic event” such that the worker’s subsequent stress condition was an “accident” within the meaning of the Workers Compensation Act, S.N.S. 1994-95, c. 10.

26. April 2005 0
Administrative law – Workers compensation – Benefits – Statutory provisions – Accident – Definition – Traumatic event – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness – Patent unreasonableness Children’s Aid Society of Cape Breton-Victoria v. Nova Scotia (Workers’ Compensation Appeals Tribunal), [2005] N.S.J. No. 75, Nova Scotia Court ...

A petition seeking an order quashing the decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal (the “WCAT”) and a declaration that the petitioner was not a “worker” was dismissed by the Court as the Court found that the WCAT did not act beyond its jurisdiction and its decision was not patently unreasonable

25. January 2005 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Validity and application of policies – Worker – definition – Statutory provisions – Jurisdiction – Judicial review – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Harris v. 149925 Canada Ltd., [2004] B.C.J. No. 2542, British Columbia Supreme Court, December 6, 2004, Boyd J. The petitioner sought ...

Costello appealed the decision of the Ontario Securities Commission (the “Commission”) which found that he had acted as an “advisor” without being registered to do so under section 25(1)(c) of the Securities Act, R.S.O. 1990 C. s.5 (the “Act”). The court employed a standard of review of reasonableness and found that the Commission’s decision was reasonable and supported by the evidence.

28. September 2004 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Securities Commission – Personal interests – Public interest – Stock brokers and advisors – Disciplinary proceedings – Advisor – definition – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Costs Costello v. Ontario (Securities Commission), [2004] O.J. No. 2972, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, July ...

The New Brunswick Court of Appeal held that the Court of Queen’s Bench did not have jurisdiction to hear and determine the Appellant’s application for a judicial review of a decision of the New Brunswick Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities, since the appellant was a “public utility” and its avenue of appeal was directly to the Court of Appeal. The limitation period had expired and the Board’s decision was beyond judicial review.

28. September 2004 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities – Judicial review application – Jurisdiction of court – Public utility – definition – Compliance with legislation – Limitations Cooperators General Insurance Co. v. New Brunswick (Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities), [2004] N.B.J. No. 289, New Brunswick Court of Appeal, July 22, 2004, ...

The Plaintiff “held an office” with the Defendant Municipality and therefore a duty of fairness applied to the administrative decision to terminate his employment. The Plaintiff was entitled to a hearing which he did not receive; therefore, the Defendant municipality did not comply with its duty of procedural fairness in terminating his employment.

24. August 2004 0
Administrative law – Employment law – Termination of employment – Wrongful dismissal – Hold an office – definition – Damages – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Municipal councils – Judicial review – Administrative decisions – Procedural requirements and fairness Reglin v. Creston (Town), [2004] B.C.J. No. 1218, British Columbia Supreme Court, June 10, 2004, Melnick J. The Plaintiff ...

The appeal by the B.C. Housing Commission (the “Commission”) of a decision of the Supreme Court reversing an arbitrator’s decision allowing the termination of Schubach’s tenancy was dismissed. The Court of Appeal held that a landlord of a complex of residential buildings was not entitled to terminate the tenancy of a tenant in one of the buildings because of acts committed in another of the buildings by a person that the tenant “permitted in or on the residential property or residential premises”.

27. January 2004 0
Administrative law – Landlord and tenant – Residential tenancy agreements – Termination – Conduct of tenant – Residential premises – Definition – Residential property – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Housing Commission – Jurisdiction – Judicial review – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Schubach v. British Columbia (Housing Management Commission), [2003] B.C.J. No. 2664, British Columbia Court ...

The Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench concluded that the Appeals Commission of the WCB (the “Appeals Commission”) made no reviewable error in concluding that the Respondent was an insured worker acting in the course of his employment when he was involved in a motor vehicle accident with the Applicant who was similarly subject to the operation of the Workers Compensation Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. W-15 (the “Act”). In the result, the Applicant was barred by operation of s. 23(1) of the Act from pursuing a civil action commenced against the Respondent for losses occasioned in the accident.

23. December 2003 0
Administrative law – Workers compensation – Statutory provisions – Worker – Definition – Immunity from civil actions – Judicial review application – Administrative decisions Barker v. Sowa, [2003] A.J. No. 1276, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, October 16, 2003, Bielby J. The Applicant applied for judicial review of the decision of the Appeals Commission dated August 7, ...

An application by the Ontario Children’s Lawyer (“CLO”), for judicial review of an Order and a reconsideration decision issued by an adjudicator of the Respondent Information and Privacy Commissioner, to the effect that the senior adjudicator, David Goodis, be precluded from participating in the judicial review of the Order and subsequent reconsideration decision issued by him regarding a request by Jane Doe, a former client of CLO, for the file created while she was a child client of CLO and where CLO acted as her litigation guardian in two motor vehicle accident cases. The motion was dismissed and the Court considered and dismissed the judicial review application itself.

25. November 2003 0
Administrative law – Freedom of information and protection of privacy – Disclosure – Privacy commissioner – Standing in judicial review – Statutory interpretation – Adjudication – Crown counsel – Definition – Crown litigation privilege – Solicitor-client privilege – Judicial review – Parties – Standard of review – Reasonableness – Correctness Ontario (Children’s Lawyer) v. Ontario (Information and Privacy Commissioner), [2003] O.J. No. ...

The Minister of Health Planning was successful in overturning a portion of the remedy aspect of a decision of the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal directing the Minister to amend the birth registration form to provide an option of identifying as a parent, a non-biological parent who is the co-parent of a mother or a father. The court found that the Human Rights Tribunal was within its jurisdiction to Order that the Minister cease discriminating against same gender parents but exceeded its jurisdiction in directing that the Minister take specific steps with respect to altering the birth registration form.

23. September 2003 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Jurisdiction – Remedies – Declaratory relief – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Sexual orientation – Gender – Parent – definition – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness British Columbia (Minister of Health Planning) v. British Columbia (Human Rights Tribunal), [2003] B.C.J. No. 17552, British ...

The Workers’ Compensation Commission was unsuccessful in appealing a decision of the Trial Division which had overturned a decision of one of the Commission’s internal review specialists relating to whether or not the Commission was entitled to maintain a subrogated action. The Court of Appeal found that the decision of the internal review specialist was patently unreasonable as it resulted from an inappropriate approach to statutory interpretation.

23. September 2003 0
Administrative law – Workers compensation – Subrogated actions – Administrative decisions – Statutory provisions – Use – Definition – Statutory interpretation vs. judicial interpretation – Judicial review application – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Warford v. Weir’s Construction Ltd., [2003] N.J. No. 178, Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court – Court of Appeal, July 17, 2003, Cameron, ...