The appeal by the Law Society of Upper Canada from a decision setting aside a finding of professional misconduct and the imposition of disbarment of a lawyer (“Igbinosun”) was dismissed where the Court found that the Hearing Panel had denied Igbinosun natural justice by refusing to adjourn proceedings to permit counsel to attend

28. July 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Law Societies – Barristers and solicitors – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Penalties and suspensions – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice – Delay – Stay of proceedings Igbinosun v. Law Society of ...

The Court allowed an appeal of a decision of a chambers judge who had struck out the sanctions imposed by the Appellant Institute against the Respondent, an appraiser. The Court found that the chambers judge erred in his finding that the Institute had failed to deal fairly with the Respondent, with respect to its failure to provide the Respondent a hearing at the investigation stage, the participation of the investigator in charge of the file in the disciplinary proceedings, and the fact that the adjudicating Committee received the investigating committee’s report 30 days before it received the Respondent’s brief.

23. June 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Real estate appraisal – Real estate appraisers – Disciplinary proceedings – Competence – Penalties and suspensions – Hearings – Fairness; Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness Egerton v. Appraisal Institute of Canada, [2009] O.J. No. 1880, 2009 ONCA 390, Ontario Court of Appeal, May 11, 2009, ...

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. ...

A municipal Board of Directors, such as the Cariboo Regional District Board of Directors, has jurisdiction to govern the conduct of its directors and discipline their misconduct. In inquiring into alleged misconduct by and disciplining one of its members for misconduct, the board has a duty to afford procedural fairness to the member in question. Where complaints are made against the member which the board intended to consider in potentially sanctioning the member’s conduct, the member is entitled to proper notice. Proper notice in these circumstances must convey some precision and be capable of appreciation by the recipient such that he or she is aware of what specific alleged misconduct will be considered and sanctions sought by the board. The person has to be given specifics of the complaints that might permit a reasoned and structured response. He or she should be given a reasonable opportunity to consult with counsel, study and respond to the allegations. Where a municipal board acts with a complete disregard for fair process in disciplining one of its members, special costs may be awarded on an application by the member for a judicial review of the board’s decision..

26. May 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Municipal councils – Regional Districts – Board of Directors – Discipline of directors – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Notice – Fairness – Costs – Judicial review – Jurisdiction – Procedural requirements and fairness – Disclosure Barnett v. Cariboo (Regional District), [2009] B.C.J. No. 713, British ...

A lawyer (“Sternberg”) was successful in his application for judicial review of a decision of the Ontario Racing Commission (the “Commission”) in which it ordered that Sternberg be prohibited from appearing as counsel before the Commission where the Court held that the hearing before the Commission was conducted in such a way as to raise a reasonable apprehension of bias towards Sternberg

25. November 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Racing Commission – Barristers and solicitors – Professional misconduct – Judicial review – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Contempt – Procedural requirements and fairness – Bias – Reasonable apprehension of bias – test – Compliance with legislation – Jurisdiction of tribunal Sternberg v. Ontario (Racing Commission), ...

The Appeals by three corporations and four individuals from findings of fraud and misrepresentation, and from sanctions imposed by the Securities Commission were dismissed where the Court held that the Commission was entitled to use interview evidence obtained during the investigative process

25. November 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Securities Commission – Investigations – Stock brokers – Disciplinary proceedings – Penalties – Suspensions – Public interest – Judicial review – Hearings – Evidence – Interviews – Disclosure – Hearsay Evidence – admissibility Alberta (Securities Commission) v. Brost, [2008] A.J. No. 1071, Alberta Court of Appeal, October ...

The appellant strip club successfully appealed the dismissal of its judicial review application of the City of Hamilton’s licensing committee’s decision to revoke its adult entertainment license for failure to actively carry on business within a reasonable time. The Court of Appeal found that the City’s failure to provide proper disclosure of the basis of the proposed revocation and an accurate statement of grounds tainted the hearing from the outset and denied the appellant’s right to a fair hearing. This failure to comply with its obligation of procedural fairness was sufficient to set aside the licensing committee’s recommendation and council’s decision adopting it.

28. October 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Municipal councils – Permits and licences – Renewal of business licence – By-laws – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Disclosure – Evidence – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice 1657575 Ontario Inc. (c.o.b. Pleasures Gentlemen’s Club) v. Hamilton (City), [2008] O.J. No. ...

The appeal by the Law Society of Upper Canada (“LSUC”) from a decision of the Appeal Panel which reversed the Hearing Panel’s decision refusing to reinstate a former judge’s membership in the Law Society was dismissed where the Court agreed with the Appeal Panel that the Hearing Panel’s finding as to the appropriate standard of proof was incorrect and undermined the Hearing Panel’s decision to such an extent that its conclusions could not stand

23. September 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Law Societies – Judges – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Barristers and solicitors – Restoration of membership – Public interest – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Jurisdiction – Judicial review – Evidence – Standard of proof Law Society of Upper Canada v. Evans, [2008] O.J. ...

A lawyer (“Igbinosun”) was successful in his appeal of a decision of the Hearing Panel of the Law Society of Upper Canada (the “LSUC”) where the Court found that the Hearing Panel failed to act judiciously in refusing Igbinosun’s request for an adjournment of the Hearing.

23. September 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Law Societies – Barristers and solicitors – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Disciplinary proceedings – Penalties and suspensions – Public interest – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Adjournment – Judicial review – Procedural fairness – Natural justice – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – ...

The Court dismissed an application for judicial review of a decision of the respondent medical association, which by an order of its Council, directed an inquiry committee to hold a new hearing investigating the applicant’s actions. This application was premature because the inquiry committee’s decision was interlocutory in nature and the jurisdictional question exception did not apply. If the application was not premature, the standard of review was reasonableness and the Council’s decisions were reasonable.

22. July 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Veterinary Associations – Veterinarians – Disciplinary proceedings – Judicial review application – Premature – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Jurisdiction – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Bajwa v. British Columbia Veterinary Medical Association, [2008] B.C.J. No. 1131, British ...