After eight years, an articled student is given the right to be enrolled by the Law Society of British Columbia (“LawSoc”) with conditions

28. January 2014 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Law Societies – Barristers and solicitors – Admission to profession – Hearings – Judicial review – Evidence – Credibility – Compliance with legislation – Failure to provide adequate reasons Mohan v. Law Society of British Columbia, [2013] B.C.J. No. 2487, 2013 BCCA 489, British Columbia Court of Appeal, ...

The Court allowed, in part, the application for judicial review by several Vancouver taxi companies of seven decisions of the Passenger Transportation Board that permitted certain suburban tax companies, not licensed for the City of Vancouver, to pick up passengers in the Downtown Vancouver Entertainment District during certain peak weekend hours. While the Court found it was reasonable for the Board to hear the matters together, that the Board did not act unfairly in conducting a written hearing, and the determination of the boundaries of the Downtown Vancouver Entertainment District was within the Board’s jurisdiction, it was patently unreasonable for the Board to not permit the Vancouver taxi companies to make submissions on the suburban taxi companies’ application for temporary permits as the decision was arbitrary and failed to consider the interests of the Vancouver taxi companies. The Board’s concern that hearing these submissions would result in delay was not an acceptable justification. A refusal to hear a person who would be affected by a decision of the Board is prima facie failure to “hear the other side” and a breach of the audi alteram partem principle. As a result, the temporary permit application was remitted to the Board for reconsideration after hearing submissions of the Vancouver Taxi Company.

24. December 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Passenger Transportation Board – Taxis – Permits and licences – Hearings – Consolidation – Fairness – Judicial review – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness – Delay – Jurisdiction Yellow Cab Co. v. Passenger Transportation Board, [2013] B.C.J. No. 2321, 2013 BCSC 1930, British Columbia Supreme Court, ...

The Applicant police constable successfully sought leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal in respect of a fresh hearing that was conducted by the Respondent, Law Enforcement Review Board, relating to a penalty that was imposed on him by the other Respondent, the Edmonton Police Service

26. November 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Police Review Board – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Penalties and suspensions – Hearings  – Hearing de novo – Judicial review – Appeals – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Furlong v. Edmonton Police Service, [2013] A.J. No. 1119, 2013 ABCA ...

The Applicant, Mr. Dorn, unsuccessfully sought judicial review of a decision of the Respondent’s council. That decision said that his appeal of a discipline committee decision was on the record, and not a hearing de novo.

24. September 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Association of Professional Engineers – Rules and by-laws – Engineers – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Disciplinary proceedings – Hearings – Hearing de novo – Judicial review – Appeals – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Dorn v. Assn. of Professional Engineers ...

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Divisional Court, confirmed that employees have an evidentiary onus to prove a prima facie case of discrimination before the burden shifts to the employer to provide a credible and rational explanation that its actions were not discriminatory

27. August 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Harassment – Disability – Sexual orientation – Hearings – Judicial review – Evidence Walton Enterprises v. Lombardi, [2013] O.J. No. 3306, 2013 ONSC 4218, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, July 11, 2013, A.M. Molloy, K.E. Swinton and ...

The appellant sought to have a decision of the Saskatchewan Registered Nurses’ Association reversed on the basis that its failure to grant the appellant an adjournment constituted a breach of procedural fairness and a denial of natural justice. The Court allowed the appeal, noting that the public protection aspect of a speedy hearing was not a factor as the appellant was no longer working as a registered nurse, and that the serious consequences of the hearing warranted the appellant the right to be heard.

28. May 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Nurses’ Association – Nurses – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Investigations – Disciplinary proceedings – Public interest – Hearings – Adjournment of hearing – Judicial review – Disclosure of records – Evidence – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness Pittman v. Saskatchewan Registered Nurses’ Assn. ...

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal by the College of Pharmacists of British Columbia from a decision of a chambers judge on an application for judicial review. The Appeal Court found that the chambers judge erred in remitting a matter back to the College’s Discipline Committee for rehearing solely on the issue of penalty and not on the merits in circumstances where the judge found the respondent pharmacist’s admissions to be equivocal. Having found that the admissions of professional misconduct were equivocal and therefore could not be relied upon, the chambers judge ought to have considered whether a new hearing or admission of further evidence was necessary in the interest of justice. As a result, the appeal was allowed and the question of liability on the two counts of professional misconduct was remitted back to the Disciplinary Committee of the College of Pharmacists.

23. April 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Pharmacists – Pharmacists – Professional misconduct or condut unbecoming – Disciplinary proceedings – Penalties – Public interest – Judicial review – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Evidence Farbeh v. College of Pharmacists of British Columbia, [2013] B.C.J. No. 483, 2013 BCCA 59, British Columbia ...

This was an application by the Chief of the Edmonton Police Service (the “Chief”) for leave to appeal a decision by the Law Enforcement Review Board (the “Board”)

27. December 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Law Enforcement Review Board – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Hearings – Judicial review – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Edmonton (City) Police Service v. Alberta (Law Enforcement Review Board), [2012] A.J. No. 1172, 2012 ABCA 357, Alberta ...

A man who worked in mining operations of Xstrata Canada Corporation (“Xstrata”) between 1979 and 1996 (“LeBlanc”) was successful on appeal from a decision of the Appeal Tribunal of the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission (“Appeals Tribunal”) for reimbursement of medical treatment related to heavy metals detected in his blood

24. July 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Policies – Workers Compensation – Benefits – Hearings – Fairness  – Conduct of hearings – Independent expert – Judicial review – Witnesses – Evidence – Procedural requirements and fairness LeBlanc v. New Brunswick (Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission), [2012] N.B.J. No. 199, 2012 NBCA 49, New Brunswick Court of ...

The public law remedy of judicial review is not available to contest the removal and expulsion of a Chairperson of the Board of Directors of the Port of Dalhousie, a non-profit body incorporated under the Companies Act, R.S.N.B. 1973, c. C 13. The Port of Dalhousie is not a body that exercises statutory powers in the discharge of any regulatory or other governmental responsibilities. While it may have been incorporated to pursue some public good, it is not a creature of statute any different from any other non-profit corporation. While the functions of the corporation may serve the public interest, they are not regulatory in nature. The main function of the corporation is to conduct a business: managing the Port. The decision making power of the Port of Dalhousie is not sufficiently of a public character to be subject to the Court’s power of judicial review.

25. October 2011 0
Administrative law – Associations and clubs – Governance – Judicial review application – Availability – Public body – definition – Hearings – Remedies – Hearing de novo – Private law remedies Maltais v. Port of Dalhousie Inc., [2011] N.B.J. No. 309, 2011 NBCA 84, New Brunswick Court of Appeal, September 22, 2011, A. Deschenes, J.C.M. ...