The Applicant applied for an order to cancel the revocation of his firearms licence by a firearms officer, arguing that the revocation was unreasonable because the officer’s investigation was procedurally flawed and violated the rules of natural justice. The Court dismissed the application, finding that there was no obligation under the Firearms Act for the officer to disclose the case against the Applicant and to provide him with an opportunity to be heard before the officer made his decision.

28. August 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Firearms Officer – Firearms – licences – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice – Bias – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter McDonald (Re), [2007] B.C.J. No. 1318, British Columbia Provincial Court, June 13, 2007, A.E. Rounthwaite The Applicant applied for ...

An Indian (“Pogson”) within the meaning of the Indian Act successfully applied for a reference under s.74(1) of the Firearms Act (the “Act”) to overturn the decision of a delegate of the Chief Firearms Officer who had rejected her application for a licence to possess and acquire non restricted firearms.

25. May 2004 0
Administrative law – Aboriginal issues – Firearms – licences – Infringement on Aboriginal rights – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Firearms Officer – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence – Judicial notice Pogson v. Alberta (Chief Firearms Officer), [2004] A.J. No. 248, Alberta Provincial Court, March 1, 2004, Demetrick Prov. ...

The Appellant appealed the reference hearing judge’s decision to refuse to grant a firearms licence. In December of 1997, the Appellant was issued a Firearms Acquisition Certificate valid to December 2002. As a result of an allegation of historical sexual assault, the Chief Firearms Officer examined the Appellant’s criminal record, which included convictions for assaults 13 and 18 years earlier. His licence to possess firearms was revoked on the grounds that he had “demonstrated a history of behaviour that includes violence”. The Appellant applied for a reference before a judge of the Ontario Court of Justice. The decision was upheld and he appealed that decision to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, who held that the Appellant had not satisfied the court that cancelling the revocation was not justified.

28. October 2003 0
Administrative law – Firearms registration – Firearms – Licences – Revocation – Evidence – Prior criminal charges – Public safety – Statutory interpretation – Legislation – Retrospective operation R. v. D.L.B., [2003] O.J. No. 2471, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, February 12, 2003, Durno J. 45-year-old D.B. had used firearms for a long time. In 1992, ...