The Ontario Labour Relations Board did not err in consolidating and hearing together the reprisal complaint of the Respondent against his former employer at the same time as the employer’s motion for contempt. The Respondent was not denied a fair hearing as a result of both matters being heard together.

26. April 2005 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Labour and employment boards – Jurisdiction – Hearings – Consolidation – Contempt – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence McNaught v. Toronto Transit Commission, [2005] O.J. No. 224, Ontario Court of Appeal, January 27, 2005, J.M. Simmons, E.E. Gillese JJ.A. and P.C. Hennessy J. (ad hoc) ...

With one exception, the decision of the Discipline Committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (the “Committee”) to disclose confidential third party records pertaining to various complainants was confirmed

22. March 2005 0
Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Judicial review – Disclosure of third party records – Relevance of information disclosed – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario v. Au, [2005] O.J. No. 234, Ontario ...

The Appellant, Dr. D, appealed to the Ontario Superior Court from the decision of the Discipline Committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (the “Committee”) whereby the Committee found Dr. D. to have engaged in professional misconduct in relation to his care and treatment of three terminally ill cancer patients. The Appellant also appealed the consequent decision to impose the penalty of revocation. The appeals against both the convictions and the penalty were dismissed.

22. March 2005 0
Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Penalties – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Double jeopardy – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Devgan v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, ...

The appellants were charged with three summary conviction offences relating to tax evasion under the Excise Tax Act. Before trial, the Crown refused to produce or disclose 55 items of information. Among those items were two items revealing the identity of other taxpayers, which the Crown maintained constituted confidential information, and three legal opinions for which the Crown claimed solicitor-client privilege. The trial judge ordered production of these items, a decision that was overturned on judicial review. The appeal of the judicial review was dismissed.

22. February 2005 0
Administrative law – Judicial review – Disclosure of documents – Jurisdiction – Failure to provide reasons – Evidence Chapelstone Developments Inc. v. Canada, [2004] N.B.J. No. 450, New Brunswick Court of Appeal, December 2, 2004, Turnbull, Robertson and Richard JJ.A. The trial judge ordered production of these five items, but failed to give reasons for ...

A Superintendent of Motor Vehicles-delegated adjudicator decision that a driver (“Taylor”) was issued a valid breathalyzer demand prior to being suspended was restored on the Superintendent’s appeal from a judgment which had remitted the matter to a delegate of the Superintendent for disposition

22. February 2005 0
Administrative law – Motor vehicles – Refusal of breathalyzer test – Adjudication – Evidence – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Taylor v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles), [2004] B.C.J. No. 2613, British Columbia Court of Appeal, December 8, 2004, Lambert, Newbury and Saunders JJ.A. On March 27th, ...

The appeal from a decision which found the appellant guilty of professional misconduct in relation to allegations of inappropriate sexual activity with a student was dismissed as there was evidence before the Panel to support the conclusion that the appellant had engaged in such activity

25. January 2005 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Teachers – Teachers – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Evidence – Witnesses X. v. British Columbia College of Teachers, [2004] B.C.J. No. 2528, British Columbia Supreme Court, December 3, 2004, Cole J. The ...

The court held that the Minister’s determination that there had not been a previous commitment to the Appellant with respect to a snow crab licence and that the condition respecting commencement of the processing operations had not been met were contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence and ought to be set aside. The matter was remitted back to the Minister for reconsideration.

28. December 2004 0
Administrative law – Fisheries – Permits and licences – Compliance with legislation – Powers under legislation – Abuse of ministerial discretion – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Ministerial orders – Judicial review – Evidence – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness St. Anthony Seafoods Limited Partnership v. Newfoundland and Labrador (Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture), [2004] N.J. No. 336, ...

A fisherman (“Decker”) succeeded on his application for judicial review of the decision of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans (the “Minister”) refusing his application for a shrimp licence

28. December 2004 0
Administrative law – Fisheries – Licence applications – Permits and licences – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Ministerial – Judicial review – Evidence Decker v. Canada (Attorney General), [2004] F.C.J. No 1762, Federal Court, October 20, 2004, O’Keefe J. Decker was a core enterprise fisher in Newfoundland and Labrador holding a groundfish licence. In April of 1997, the ...

A motorist who had received three roadside suspensions within two years (“Gyles”) was unsuccessful in his appeal of the dismissal of his application for judicial review of the decision of the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles (the “Superintendent”) prohibiting him from driving. Gyles had failed to submit to a required medical examination.

28. December 2004 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Motor vehicles – Suspension of driver’s licence – Evidence – Mandatory medical examination – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation Gyles v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles), [2004] B.C.J. No 2158, British Columbia Court of Appeal, October 21, 2004, Finch C.J.B.C., Esson and Newbury JJ.A. The Court of ...

J.M.D.’s appeal of the dismissal of her claim for compensation pursuant to the Victims’ Rights and Services Act was allowed by the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal. The court held that the N.S. Utility and Review Board erred in the manner in which it considered and disposed of evidence of a witness tendered as similar fact evidence.

28. December 2004 0
Administrative law – Judicial review – Administrative decisions – Review Board – Evidence – Witnesses – Similar fact evidence admissibility J.M.D. v. Nova Scotia (Utility and Review Board), [2004] N.S.J. No. 400, Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, October 28, 2004, Glube C.J.N.S. J.M.D. claimed that, when she was a nursing student in Halifax in the mid-60s, ...