The application for judicial review by Maisonneuve of the decision rendered by the Minister of Justice of Canada ordering his surrender to the United States of America was allowed where the Court found that the Minister’s interpretation of evidence regarding the participation of the US and Canadian police authorities was patently unreasonable

26. June 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Ministerial orders – Extradition – Investigations – Judicial review – Jurisdiction – Procedural requirements and fairness – Failure to provide reasons – Evidence Maisonneuve v. Canada (Minister of Justice), [2006] Q.J. No. 4054, Quebec Court of Appeal, July 31, 2006, François Pelletier J.A., François Doyon J.A. and Lise ...

The Court of Appeal overturned a WCAT Commissioner’s decision entitling a worker to workers’ compensation benefits. The Court found that the WCAT Commissioner made a series of patently unreasonable findings with respect to the medical evidence. The Court held that the conclusions regarding the medical expert opinion that the Commissioner made were directly contradicted by the physicians in their reports. The Court found that the Commissioner’s mistakes in understanding, interpreting, describing and applying the medical evidence was central to the Tribunal’s reasoning and amounted to errors of law requiring the Court of Appeal’s intervention.

22. May 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Benefits – Judicial review – Evidence Metropolitan Entertainment Group v. Nova Scotia (Workers’ Compensation Appeals Tribunal), [2007] N.S.J. No. 88, Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, March 6, 2007, E.A. Roscoe, T.A. Cromwell and J.W.S. Saunders JJ.A. The employer appealed a decision from the Workers’ ...

A forestry company (“International”) was unsuccessful on an application for judicial review from a decision of the BC Human Rights Tribunal (“Tribunal”) that a voluntary severance agreement (“Agreement”) ratified by the forestry workers union discriminated against non-active employees because active employees were offered severance pay under the Agreement, whereas non-active employees were not

24. April 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Disability –  Employment law – Severance pay – Labour law – Collective agreements – Judicial review – Evidence – Jurisdiction – Standard of review – Correctness International Forest Products Ltd. v. Sandhu, [2007] B.C.J. No. 289, British Columbia Supreme Court, February ...

The Court allowed an appeal from two decisions of the Benchers of the Law Society, concluding that the Appellant had acted incompetently in permitting a witness to swear an affidavit and imposing a reprimand. The Panel had erred by making a finding of incompetence when that issue was not before the Panel, making a finding of fact on no evidence, and failing to follow proper procedure in amending the citation.

24. April 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Law Societies – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Barristers and solicitors – Disciplinary proceedings – Judicial review – Evidence – Compliance with legislation – Jurisdiction – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Sheddy v. Law Society of British Columbia, [2007] ...

The appeal by the Minister of Human Resources Development (the “Minister”) from a judgment dismissing an application for judicial review of a June 6, 2005 Pension Appeals Board decision was allowed where the Court found that Hogervorst lacked an arguable case that she was disabled and offered no sufficient explanation for delay in bringing her appeal from the initial decision

27. March 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Pension Appeals Board – Judicial review – Jurisdiction of tribunal – Evidence – Estoppel and res judicata – Limitations Canada (Minister of Human Resources Development) v. Hogervorst, [2007] F.C.J. No. 37, Federal Court of Appeal, January 15, 2007, Létourneau, Malone and Ryer JJ.A. Hogervorst, a 46-year-old registered nurse, applied for ...

The Applicant sought relief from the Court from an Appeal Tribunal that upheld the decision of a Board of Judges that found the Applicant was in violation of the Rules of Racing established by Horse Racing Alberta. The Court found that the appropriate standard of review was correctness. The Court quashed the Appeal Tribunal’s decision, and granted an Order of mandamus directing that there be no further action taken against the Applicant.

27. February 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Horse Racing – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Judicial review – Evidence – Admissibility – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Correctness – Remedies – Mandamus Hennessy v. Horse Racing Alberta, [2006] A.J. No. 1613, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, December 15, 2006, Sanderman J. The ...

The Petitioner sought judicial review of a decision of an Adjudicator of the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles confirming an administrative driving prohibition. The BCSC held that the standard of review was patent unreasonableness. The Court concluded that the Adjudicator’s decision was patently unreasonable and remitted the matter to re-hearing.

27. February 2007 0
Administrative law – Motor vehicles – Breathalyser test – Suspension of driver’s licence – Adjudication – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Superintendent of Motor Vehicles – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Judicial review – Evidence – Admissibility – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Swanson v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles), ...

This was an application pursuant to the Judicial Review Procedure Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 241 by the Petitioner for an order of certiorari quashing the decision of an Adjudicator acting under section 94.5 of the Motor Vehicle Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c.318 (“MVA”). The Adjudicator’s decision confirmed an administrative driving prohibition imposed on the Petitioner by a police officer. The Court held that the applicable standard of review with respect to the decision of the Adjudicator, based upon a finding of fact, is patent unreasonableness. The Court held that the Adjudicator’s decision was not patently unreasonable and dismissed the application for judicial review.

27. February 2007 0
Administrative law – Motor vehicles – Breathalyser test – Adjudication – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Superintendent of Motor Vehicles – Judicial review – Evidence – Admissibility – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness LeBlanc v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles), [2006] B.C.J. No. 3237, British Columbia Supreme Court, December 14, 2006, Bruce J. A police officer ...

The Petitioner sought judicial review of a decision of an adjudicator with the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch who had imposed a four-day suspension of the Petitioner’s liquor licence for supplying liquor to a minor. The Court dismissed the petition and held that the Adjudicator had properly exercised the discretion open to him and his decision was not unreasonable.

27. February 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Liquor Licensing Board – Permits and licences – Penalties and Suspensions – Judicial review – Adjudication – Evidence – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness – Reasonableness simpliciter Butterworth Holdings Ltd. v. British Columbia (General Manager, Liquor Control and Licensing Branch), [2007] B.C.J. No. 10, British Columbia Supreme ...

The Court dismissed the appeal by the Director of Ontario Disability Support Program from a decision by the Divisional Court allowing Crane’s appeal from the denial of her claim for disability benefits and ordering a new hearing.

23. January 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Disability Support Program – Hearings – Appeals – Judicial review – Evidence – Natural justice Crane v. Ontario (Director, Disability Support Program), [2006] O.J. No. 4546, Ontario Court of Appeal, November 15, 2006, K.N. Feldman, J.C. MacPherson and R.J. Sharpe, JJ.A. Crane applied for disability benefits on May 28, ...