The Appellant police officer, Mr. Spinks, successfully appealed the decision of the Law Enforcement Review Board, which had overturned a decision of the Superintendent of Police. The Superintendent had acquitted Mr. Spinks of Discreditable Conduct in relation to information he disclosed during a child abuse investigation.

26. July 2011 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Law Enforcement Review Board – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Judicial review – Disclosure – Evidence – Failure to provide reasons Spinks v. Alberta (Law Enforcement Review Board), [2011] A.J. No. 593, 2011 ABCA 162, Alberta Court of Appeal, May 27, ...

Sanctions were imposed on a chiropractor by the chiropractor’s Newfoundland and Labrador Chiropractic Board (the “Board”). The Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court allowed the chiropractor’s appeal on the basis that the Board did not comply with its duty to give reasons for its decision. The complaint was remitted back to the Board for consideration.

26. July 2011 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Chiropractic Board – Chiropractors – Disciplinary proceedings – Penalties and suspensions – Judicial review – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness – Failure to provide reasons – Costs MacAllister v. Newfoundland and Labrador Chiropractic Board, [2011] N.J. No. 205, 2011 NLTD(G) 85, Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme ...

The Alberta Court of Appeal held that the Energy Resources Conservation Board’s decision to reject expert evidence submitted after the deadline was a proper exercise of its discretion under the Energy Resources Conservation Act

28. June 2011 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Energy Resources Conservation Board – Environmental matters – Oil wells – Protections of species – Evidence – Expert reports – Admissibility – Appeals – Leave to appeal – review – Jurisdiction – Procedural requirements and fairness – Failure to provide reasons – Standard of review – Correctness ...

A former teacher (“Headrick”) applied for judicial review of a decision of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) which had referred his application for a Certificate of Qualification and Registration (“Certificate”) to the College’s Disciplinary Committee

24. May 2011 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Teachers – Restoration of membership – Teachers – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Disciplinary proceedings – Suspension – Public interest – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Correctness – Failure to provide reasons – ...

A teacher (“Aris”) succeeded in setting aside an interim suspension order issued by the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) which suspended his teacher’s certificate pending the resolution of a complaint. His judicial review application was granted

24. May 2011 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Teachers – Teachers – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Disciplinary proceedings – Penalties – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Procedural requirements and fairness – Failure to provide reasons Aris v. Ontario College of Teachers, [2011] O.J. No. 1400, 2011 ONSC 1202, Ontario Superior ...

Lack of procedural fairness by an administrative tribunal resulted in the British Columbia Supreme Court referring the matter back to the administrative tribunal on an expedited basis with the registrant member having the opportunity to make submissions on conditions, versus suspension

24. May 2011 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Dental Surgeons – Inquiry committee decisions – Dentists – Disciplinary proceedings – Penalties and suspensions – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Notice – Failure to provide reasons – Confidentiality Stelmaschuk v. College of Dental Surgeons of British Columbia, [2011] B.C.J. No. 750, ...

The Canadian Recording Industry Association (“Association”) applied for judicial review of the decision of the Copyright Board (“Board”) with respect to the appropriate royalty rate payable under a tariff regarding permanent downloads, limited downloads and on-demand streaming. Specifically, the Association alleged that the Board applied the wrong standard of proof in relation to the determination of certain costs in the digital music business, that it erred in accepting inadmissible expert evidence, that it calculated the royalty rate on a faulty basis and that it failed to provide adequate reasons for its decision. The court dismissed the Association’s application. The court found that there was no basis in procedural fairness to challenge the manner in which the Board dealt with its evidence.

22. February 2011 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Copyright Board – Intellectual property – Copyright – Recorded music – Regulation of rates – Judicial review – Evidence – Standard of proof – Procedural requirements and fairness – Failure to provide reasons Canadian Recording Industry Assn. v. Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada, ...

The Court of Appeal held that the failure of a member of the Human Rights Tribunal to address an inconsequential piece of evidence in written reasons does not amount to a breach of procedural fairness or a substantive error

25. January 2011 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence – Failure to provide reasons Gichuru v. Law Society of British Columbia, [2010] B.C.J. No. 2390, 2010 BCCA 543, British Columbia Court of Appeal, December 2, 2010, C.A. ...

The application by the Children’s Aid Society of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo (the “Society”) for an order quashing a written decision of the Child and Family Services Board (the “Board”) on the grounds that the Board lacked jurisdiction to conduct the review was allowed where the court held that the matters at issue were “before the court” and therefore the Board was statutorily prohibited from reviewing the complaint

25. January 2011 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Child and Family Services Review Board – Judicial intervention – Protection matters – Children – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Statutory interpretation – Jurisdiction – Failure to provide reasons – Natural justice – Standard of review – Correctness Children’s Aid Society of Waterloo v. D.D., ...

A police officer (Horon) successfully appealed a decision of the Law Enforcement Review Board for the Edmonton Police Service (“Law Enforcement Review Board”) that had directed the Chief of Police to lay a charge of neglect of duty against him

28. December 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Law Enforcement Review Board – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional governance and discipline – Investigations – Reporting requirements – Judicial review – Jurisdiction – Standard of review – Correctness – Reasonableness simpliciter – Failure to provide reasons Mitzel v. Alberta (Law Enforcement Review Board), [2010] A.J. ...