You didn’t consider my reply! Canadian Human Rights Commission in breach of procedural fairness by ignoring reply submissions made by applicant to investigator’s report

19. November 2019 0
The court concluded that the Canadian Human Rights Commission committed a breach in procedural fairness when it failed to properly consider and assess reply submissions made by the applicant in response to the investigator’s initial investigation and report. The Commission could not simply adopt the investigator’s findings, when the applicant had raised new issues in ...

A professional regulatory body erred in its application of the law when assessing whether collateral police evidence was admissible

16. April 2019 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – College of Veterinarians – Judicial review – Appeals – Evidence – admissibility – Standard of review – Correctness – Veterinarians – Disciplinary proceedings College of Veterinarians of Ontario v. Choong, [2019] O.J. No. 837, 2019 ONSC 946, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, February 20, 2019, G.B. Morawetz R.S.J., C.J. Horkins ...

Federal Court agrees with veteran pension applicant that it was unreasonable for the pension appeal panel to consider his supporting physician’s opinion linking his injury to his armed forces services to be speculative and thus not credible. Panel’s decision was set aside and returned to a differently constituted panel for redetermination.

19. March 2019 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Veterans Review and Appeal Board – Pension Appeals Board – Disability – Eligibility – Judicial review – Appeals – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness Crummey v. Canada (Attorney General), [2019] F.C.J. No. 54, 2019 FC 73, Federal Court (Halifax, Nova Scotia), January 18, 2019, R.F. Southcott J. The ...

The applicant made a request for personal information from the Communications Security Establishment. He claimed the response was unsatisfactory. He filed a formal complaint with the Officer of Privacy Commissioner of Canada, claiming that he had been improperly denied access to his personal information. The complaint was rejected by the Privacy Commissioner. The applicant was unsuccessful before the court on judicial review. The court recognized the sensitivity of the information being requested and concluded that, in respect of some of that information, the decision of the CSE to neither deny nor confirm its existence was reasonable.

19. February 2019 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Privacy Commissioner – National defence – Disclosure of records – Judicial review – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness Martinez v. Communications Security Establishment, [2018] F.C.J. No. 1190, 2018 FC 1179, Ontario Federal Court, November 23, 2018, S.E. Roussel J. The Communications Security Establishment (the “CSE”) is administered ...

Does the Human Rights Commission have to provide reasons when dismissing a complaint? When is it appropriate on judicial review for the court to permit evidence that was not before the original decision-maker? These were some of the central questions that were before the Nova Scotia Supreme Court after the applicant filed a complaint against her employer saying that she was constructively dismissed due to a failure to accommodate her disability.

16. November 2018 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Human Rights Commission – Judicial review – Evidence – Failure to provide reasons – Standard of review – Reasonableness – Human rights complaints – Disability Kelly v. Nova Scotia (Human Rights Commission), [2018] N.S.J. No. 336, 2018 NSSC 173, Nova Scotia Supreme Court, September 11, 2018, J.M. Arnold J. ...

The appellant, Dr. Hefnawi, was enrolled in the Medical Services Plan (“MSP”). In 2010, he was audited by the Billing Integrity Program (“BIP”). The Medical Services Commission (the “Commission”) sought recovery of funds for fraudulent or mispresented patient billing and gave notice of its intention to cancel the appellants enrolment as a practitioner under the Medicare Protection Act, RSBC 1996, c. 286 (“MPA”).

16. October 2018 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Ministry of Health Billing Integrity Program – Judicial review – Appeals – Natural Justice – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence – Physicians and surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Billing matters – Records Hefnawi v Health Care Practitioners Special Committee for Audit Hearings, [2018] B.C.J. No. 2932, 2018 BCSC ...

Where there is evidence before the decision-maker to support his decision, the court ought not itself consider the scientific and technical evidence

15. May 2018 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Minister – Approval process – Environmental matters – Judicial review – Evidence – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness Sorflaten v. Nova Scotia (Minister of Environment), [2018] N.S.J. No. 91, 2018 NSSC 55, Nova Scotia Supreme Court, March 20, 2018, J.L. Chipman J. The applicants sought ...

This decision relates to a judicial review of the decision of a delegate of the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles that confirmed a notice of an immediate roadside prohibition issued to the petitioner under section 215.41 of the Motor Vehicle Act

20. March 2018 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Superintendent of Motor Vehicles – Motor vehicles – Suspension of driver’s licence – Breathalyser test – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Statutory interpretation – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness Bawa v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles), [2018] B.C.J. No. 29, 2018 BCSC 32, British ...

This decision was an appeal from the Consent and Capacity Board which found that the appellant was not capable to consent to treatment with certain psychiatric medications proposed by the respondent physician.

20. March 2018 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Consent and Capacity Board – Evidence – Judicial review – Appeals – Standard of review – Reasonableness Woods v. Chatterjee, [2018] O.J. No. 12, 2018 ONSC 73, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, January 3, 2018, P.J. Cavanagh J. The appellant was diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder and substance abuse disorder ...