The province unsuccessfully appealed from a decision of the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (the “Board”) that a man whose land had been expropriated (“Bishop”) was entitled to an Order directing a Discovery of the province’s expert appraiser

26. December 2006 0
Administrative law – Expropriation – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Utility and Review Board – Practice and procedure – Administrative tribunals – Examination for discovery – Hearings – Appeals – Disclosure – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Correctness Nova Scotia (Attorney General) v. Bishop, [2006] N.S.J. NO. 411, Nova Scotia ...

A former Coast Guard employee (“Brooks”) brought a complaint of racial discrimination under the Canadian Human Rights Act (the “Act”) against the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (the “DFO”). The Human Rights Tribunal determined that DFO had discriminated against Brooks based on his race. The Tribunal then declined to consider the remedies of reinstatement and back pay which Brooks sought. The Attorney General of Canada brought an application for judicial review to set aside the decision that the DFO had discriminated against Brooks and Brooks applied for judicial review of the decision to decline to consider the remedies.

26. December 2006 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Race – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Employment – Appointment – Remedies – Hearings – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence – Standard of review – Correctness – Reasonableness simpliciter Brooks v. Canada (Department of Fisheries and Oceans), [2006] F.C.J. No. 1569, Federal Court, ...

The Appellant dentist appealed a decision made by the Discipline Committee of the College finding him guilty of professional misconduct and imposing a three-month suspension, terms and conditions related to the practice of orthodontics and costs of $10,000. The Court upheld the College’s decision and dismissed the Appellant’s arguments including reasonable apprehension of bias, issue estoppel/res judicata, inappropriate expert or opinion evidence, and insufficient disclosure by the College.

26. December 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Dental Surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Investigations – Penalties and suspensions – Hearings – Evidence – Statutory provisions – Judicial review – Natural justice – Reasonable apprehension of bias – test – Procedural requirements and fairness – Estoppel and res judicata ...

An appeal by Global Securities from a decision of the Securities Exchange Commission Panel was dismissed. Although the Hearing Panel itself could not make submission on the merits of its own decision, the Exchange was not precluded from doing so. The Commission’s decision on standing was reasonable, as it was based on the principle that the decision directly affected the Exchange, as it engaged one of the Exchange’s primary functions, the prosecution of infractions.

28. November 2006 0
Administrative law – Stock brokers – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Securities Commission – Review of a decision of its own disciplinary panel – Hearings – Parties – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Global Securities Corp. v. British Columbia (Executive Director, Securities Commission), [2006] B.C.J. No. 2075, British Columbia Court ...

The Applicant, Mo’s Sport’s Parlour, applied for a judicial review of the Board (the “Board”) of the Alberta Gaming and Liquor Commission’s (the “Commission”) decision cancelling its licence which permitted it to operate a bar, serve liquor and have specified gaming machines in the bar. Applying the standard of review of reasonableness simpliciter, the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench held that the Commission did not breach the rules of natural justice by refusing to allow the Applicant to ask certain questions on cross-examination of a witness. It also concluded that there was a thread of reason through the Commission’s written reasons supporting this conclusion. The Court dismissed the Application for judicial review.

28. November 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Gaming and Liquor Commission – Permits and licences – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice – Evidence – Witnesses – Compliance with legislation – Statutory interpretation – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Mo’s Sports Parlour (2000) Ltd. v. ...

A lawyer (Hamilton) successfully appealed from a decision of the Law Society, which had found her guilty of professional misconduct for visiting a jail with a prisoner’s girlfriend and identifying that girlfriend as her assistant in order to facilitate access to the prisoner.

24. October 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Law Societies – Hearings – Barristers and solicitors – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct – Penalties – Suspension – Judicial review – Witnesses – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Hamilton v. Law Society of British Columbia, [2006] B.C.J. No. 1741, British Columbia Court of Appeal, August ...

The Court quashed two Orders of the Governor in Council, first suspending the Applicant without pay from his duties as President and CEO of the Business Development Bank of Canada and, second, terminating his appointment. The Government had failed in its duty to treat the Applicant fairly

24. October 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Ministerial orders – Employment law – Government employees – Termination of employment – Hearings – Fairness – Judicial review – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness Vennat v. Canada (Attorney General), [2006] F.C.J. No. 1251, Federal Court, August 23, 2006, Noël J. The Applicant had been serving as President ...

The appeal by McLeod and Miszczuk from a decision of the Securities Commission upholding the Exchange’s decision disqualifying them from being directors, officers or employees of Exchange companies was dismissed where the Court held that the lack of an oral hearing before the Commission did not render the decision unfair.

26. September 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Securities Commission – Director of corporation – Removal – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Judicial review – Evidence – Procedural requirements and fairness McLeod v. Alberta Securities Commission, [2006] A.J. No. 939, Alberta Court of Appeal, July 31, 2006, Fraser C.J.A. and Hunt and O’Brien JJ.A McLeod was ...

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal by Preston Crossing Properties (“Preston”) of an assessment decision by the Municipal Board Committee upholding an assessor’s application of a 72% market adjustment factor to the buildings, based on a notable traffic increase to the buildings rendering them more valuable than other nearby buildings. The Committee did not err in concluding that Preston was given full opportunity to develop and state its case before the Board of Revision and in upholding the market adjustment factor of .72 (as opposed to .61 in valuing buildings Preston regarded as comparable to its own) for the purposes of the assessment.

25. July 2006 0
Administrative law – Municipalities – Property assessment – Market adjustment factor – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Assessment Appeal Board – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Fairness – Judicial review – Evidence – Admissibility – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice Preston Cross Properties Inc. v. Saskatoon (City), [2006] S.J. No. 335, Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, ...

The Court allowed an appeal from a decision of the Respondent Appeal Board which had set aside the Appellant’s development permit. The Court found that there was a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of one of the members of the Board, and the matter was remitted for a re-hearing.

27. June 2006 0
Administrative law – Municipalities – Planning and zoning – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Subdivision and Development Appeal Board – Hearings – Judicial review – Bias – Natural justice Mountain Creeks Ranch Inc. v. Yellowhead (County) Subdivision and Development Appeal Board, [2006] A.J. No. 398, Alberta Court of Appeal, April 12, 2006, Conrad, Berger and Ritter JJ.A. The ...