The Court quashed the decision of the Corporation of the City of White Rock (“White Rock”) refusing to issue a development permit as being of no force and effect for taking into consideration matters not within its Official Community Plan guidelines and further issued an order in the nature of mandamus requiring the issuance of a permit

25. July 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Municipal councils – Municipalities – Building permits – By-laws – Planning and zoning – Remedies – Mandamus – Judicial review – Failure to provide reasons – Standard of review – Correctness Yearsley v. White Rock (City), [2009] B.C.J. No. 1102, 2009 BCSC 719, British Columbia Supreme Court, ...

The Court dismissed an appeal from a decision of the Health Disciplines Board, which had overturned a decision of the Acupuncture Committee. The Committee had found the Respondent guilty of professional misconduct and unskilled practice, following a complaint that the Respondent had made false allegations of sexual harassment against a fellow acupuncturist and made false allegations of improprieties in relation to acupuncture examinations against another acupuncturist. The Court upheld the Board’s finding that the Committee had failed to find justification or rationale for its conclusions.

23. June 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Acupuncture Committee – Acupuncturists – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Public interest – Judicial review – Failure to provide reasons – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Yu v. Wanglin, [2009] A.J. No. 453, 2009 ABCA 166, Alberta Court of Appeal, April ...

The Consent and Capacity Board acting pursuant to the Health Care Consent Act, 1996, S.O. 1996, in conducting a hearing to determine whether a substitute decision maker is acting in the best interests of the patient, does not have an obligation to call witnesses which could have been called by the substitute decision maker represented by counsel at the hearing. Short reasons of the Board dealing with the prior capable wish of the patient will be considered sufficient by the Court on an appeal where the Court is not prevented from a meaningful review of the correctness of the Board’s decision. An oversight on the part of the Board in failing to make a decision as to incapacity of the patient where the incapacity was largely conceded by the substitute decision maker, is unlikely to succeed as a ground of appeal of the Board’s decision that the substitute decision maker was not acting in the best interests of the patient.

26. May 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Consent and Capacity Board – Failure to provide reasons – Adult in need of protection – Capacity – Best interest of incompetent adult – Substitute decision maker – Treatment plans – Compliance with legislation – Hearings – Witnesses – failure to call Grover v. Grover, [2009] O.J. ...

The Appellant hospital appealed from a decision concluding that the Hospital Privileges Appeal Board had jurisdiction to hear the Respondent doctor’s appeal from a refusal by the hospital’s Operating Room Committee to increase his operating room time. The Court allowed the appeal, finding that the reviewing judge had failed to consider the preliminary question of whether the doctor had, as required, raised an issue of law in order to appeal from the Board’s decision, and also in applying the correctness standard to the Board’s decision. The appropriate standard of review is reasonableness, and the failure of the majority to provide reasons meant it was impossible to determine if the decision was reasonable.

23. September 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Hospital Appeal Board – Jurisdiction of tribunal – Physicians and surgeons – Hospital privileges – Appeals – Compliance with legislation – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Correctness – Failure to provide reasons Macdonald v. Mineral Springs Hospital, [2008] A.J. No., 891, Alberta ...

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed the appeal by the Registrar of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario from a decision of the Board of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario approving the application of the respondent for a liquor licence. The Board correctly noted that a criminal conviction or administrative sanction did not disqualify an applicant for a liquor licence.

27. May 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Liquor Licensing Board – Permits and licences – Public interest – Previous criminal conviction – Judicial review – Failure to provide reasons Ontario (Alcohol and Gaming Commission) v. Arena Entertainment (C.O.B. Circa), [2008] O.J. No. 1167, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Divisional Court, March 25, 2008, Lietch, ...

The appeal by a mining licence applicant (Vinland) from a Supreme Court decision returning Vinland’s appeal to the Mineral Rights Adjudication Board (the “Board”) for re-determination was dismissed where the Court found that the Board had jurisdiction to determine the Appeal but had failed to provide sufficient reasons in reaching its decision

25. March 2008 0
Administrative law – Natural resources – Mining leases – Staking requirements – Judicial review – Jurisdiction of tribunal – Natural justice – Failure to provide reasons – Evidence – Burden of proof Newfoundland and Labrador (Mineral Claims Recorder) v. Vinland Resources Ltd., [2008] N.J. No. 48, Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court – Court of Appeal, ...

The Court quashed a decision of the Appeals Committee of the respondent College refusing to readmit the applicant. The Committee’s reasons were inadequate and amounted to a breach of procedural fairness, and were so sparse as to render the decision unreasonable on the merits.

26. February 2008 0
Administrative law – Universities and colleges – Students – Admissions – Student discipline – Hearings – Procedural requirements and fairness – Failure to provide reasons – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Zeliony v. Red River College, [2007] M.J. No. 470, Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench, December 11, 2007, G.D. Joyal J. ...

The Court allowed an Appeal by a licensed practical nurse from a finding of misconduct in relation to the Appellant’s failure to report an incident. The Court found that the incident was very minor and that it was not reasonable to find a requirement to report that would attract discipline and a sanction which would seriously affect the member’s ability to work.

26. December 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Council for Licensed Practical Nurses – Nurses – Disciplinary proceedings – Reporting requirements – Judicial review – Evidence – Burden of proof – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Failure to provide reasons – Natural justice Walsh v. Council for Licensed Practical Nurses, [2007] N.J. No. ...

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 Applicant appealed the decision of the Respondent Association who had found that he had violated the Code of Ethics and Standards of Business Practice of the Association. The Court dismissed the application, finding that the Association’s decision was reasonable.

26. June 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Real estate agents – Disciplinary proceedings – Penalties – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Natural justice – Failure to provide reasons – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Rowan v. New Brunswick Real Estate Assn., (in French) [2007] N.B.J. No. 124, New Brunswick Court of Queen’s Bench, ...