An Application for judicial review of a decision of the Human Rights Commission of Newfoundland to dismiss the complaint without a hearing was dismissed as there was no information arising from the investigation of the complaint which warranted sending the matter to a full inquiry. The investigation by the Commission was impartial and both parties had full opportunity to put forward their cases.

28. March 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Discrimination – Equality rights – Judicial review – Investigations – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Francis v. CHC Composites Inc., [2006] N.J. No. 8, Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court – Trial Division, January 13, 2006, W.G. ...

An Application to quash an interim Order made by the Respondent Human Rights Tribunal requiring the Applicants to call as witnesses persons whom the Applicants did not wish to call and to produce “will-say” statements from those persons was allowed. The Tribunal’s Order was a clear breach of the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness to the Applicants and, potentially, to the witnesses and was therefore set aside. Natural justice and procedural fairness required that the parties be free to conduct their own cases.

28. March 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Hearings – Compellability of witness – Judicial review – Witnesses – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence Universal Workers Union, Labourers’ International Union of North America Local 183 v. Ontario (Human Rights Commission), [2006] O.J. No. 50, Ontario Superior Court of Justice ...

A physician (“Dr. Litchfield”) applied for judicial review of a decision by the Investigating Committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons (the “College”) finding him guilty on 9 out of 10 charges of inappropriate examinations and performing manual therapy without consent. The Court considered whether it was appropriate to deal with the judicial review application at this stage or whether it should defer to allow for completion of the internal process, including a hearing by Council and a statutory right of appeal, as set out in the Medical Profession Act, R.S.A. 220, c.M-11, (the “MPA”). The general rule is that an adequate internal appeal process should be exhausted but the Court retains discretion to allow judicial review in the face of an internal appeal in exceptional circumstances. Such circumstances did not exist. Council had broad powers to receive and consider relevant new evidence and address issues concerning legal errors and breaches of the College’s duty of fairness and duty to fairly investigate the complaints.

28. February 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Investigations – Appeal process – Physicians and Surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Judicial review – Applications – Procedural requirements and fairness – Disclosure – Evidence Litchfield v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta, [2005] A.J. No. 1771, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, ...

A lawyer (“Regular”) was unsuccessful in appealing from a decision of the Law Society Discipline Committee which found that he had failed to act with integrity and to avoid questionable conduct in fulfilling his duties as a lawyer

24. January 2006 0
Administrative law – Barristers and solicitors – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct – Sale of assets – definition – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Law Societies – Penalties – Judicial review – Evidence Law Society of Newfoundland and Labrador v. Regular, [2005] N.J. No. 372, Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court – Court of Appeal, December 5, 2005, C.K. ...

The Court affirmed, in part, an Order of the Respondent Committee requiring a physician to repay professional fees pursuant to the Saskatchewan Medical Care Insurance Act

24. January 2006 0
Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Billing matters – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice – Failure to provide reasons – Evidence Wong v. Joint Medical Professional Review Committee, [2005] S.J. No. 690, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, November 15, 2005, Ball J. The Appellant was a family physician who ...

An appeal of a decision of an applications judge that the evidence in support of applications for judicial review be restricted to the certified Tribunal record was allowed. The applications judge erred in failing to consider that evidence outside of the administrative record can be considered where the grounds for review are any of the various forms of jurisdictional error.

27. December 2005 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Marital status – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Judicial review applications – Evidence – admissibility – Jurisdiction McFayden v. Canada (Attorney General), [2005] F.C.J. No. 1817, Federal Court of Appeal, November 2, 2005, Desjardins, Evans and Sharlow JJ.A. An applications judge granted the Respondent’s motion ...

A Hearing Officer stayed a disciplinary hearing under the Ontario Police Services Act on the basis that the hearing would constitute an abuse of process after the accused police officer had been acquitted on criminal charges arising from the same conduct that triggered the hearing. This decision was quashed on judicial review as the court found that proceeding with the disciplinary hearing would not constitute an abuse of process.

22. November 2005 0
Administrative law – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Criminal charges – Evidence – Hearings – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Police Commission – Abuse of process – Test – Judicial review – Stay of proceedings – Standard of review – Correctness Peel (Regional Municipality) Police Service v. Watson, [2005] O.J. No. 3525, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, August 18, ...

A dentist (“Dr. Hover”) was unsuccessful in his appeal from a decision of the Alberta Dental Association upholding a finding of professional misconduct, including a finding that he had failed to produce his records to them without justification

22. November 2005 0
Administrative law – Dentists – Disciplinary proceedings – Hearings – Failure to produce records – Penalties and suspensions – Judicial review – Bias – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Evidence –  Of administrative tribunals – Dental Association Hover v. Alberta Dental Association, [2005] A.J. No. 1254, Alberta Court of Appeal, October 3, 2005, Conrad, Picard and ...

The Court dismissed an application for judicial review holding that the lack of a transcript of a hearing before the Respondent Board did not violate the rules of natural justice

25. October 2005 0
Administrative law – Motor vehicles – Suspension of driver’s licence – Judicial review – Failure to provide transcript of hearing – Evidence – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness – Natural justice Foster v. Alberta (Transportation and Safety Board), [2005] A.J. No. 1027, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, August 23, 2005, Romaine J. The Applicant had been ...

The Court dismissed an application for judicial review of the Human Rights Commission’s decision to dismiss the Applicant’s allegations of discrimination, but allowed her application with respect to an allegation of retaliation

25. October 2005 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Disability – Employment law – Conditions of employment – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Investigations – Evidence – Jurisdiction – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Limitations of actions – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Correctness Dubois v. Canada (Attorney ...