The Applicant physician was partially successful in seeking a declaration from the Respondent College relating to the status of his license practice medicine in New Brunswick.

23. October 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals –  College of Physicians and Surgeons – Physicians and Surgeons – Governance –  Licence to practice – Statutory provisions – Interpretation – Judicial review  –  Compliance with legislation Houshmand v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of New Brunswick, [2012] N.B.J. No. 324, 2012 NBQB 293, New Brunswick Court ...

The Court of Appeal set aside an order for treatment forthwith pursuant to s. 672.58 of the Criminal Code for the purposes of making a detained accused fit for trial. The Court held the order to be improper on the basis that the hospitals did not have the necessary facilities available and did not provide consent to the order pursuant to s. 672.62 of the Code. The consent requirement in the Code did not violate s. 7 of the Charter despite the fact that concerns regarding the patient’s liberty and security of the person were triggered when such an order was made. The Court held that even if an accused’s rights are deprived, the consent requirement ensures that the deprivation occurs in a manner that accords with the principles of fundamental justice.

24. July 2012 0
Administrative law – Mental health facility – Treatment plans –  Statutory provisions – Criminal Code – Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Life, liberty or security of the person – Prisons – Transfer of inmates – Judicial review –  Compliance with legislation –  Procedural requirements and fairness Centre for Addiction and Mental Health v. Ontario, ...

The Workers Compensation Appeal Tribunal (WCAT) appealed a decision, which allowed the Respondent’s application for a judicial review of compensation entitlement and invalidating a policy. The respondent cross-appealed the judicial review decision on the basis of the invalidation of policy.

26. June 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers compensation – Benefits – Policies – Validity and application of policies and guidelines – Statutory provisions – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Jurisdiction of court Jozipovic v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal), [2012] B.C.J. No. 801, 2012 BCCA 174, ...

The Ontario Health Professions Appeal and Review Board (“HPARB”) acted unreasonably in its decision to review a decision in respect of multiple physician registrants listed, even though the complainant had withdrawn her review request against all but one of the registrants

24. April 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Health Professions Appeal and Review Board – Complaint – Multiple registrants – Physicians and surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Statutory provisions – Compliance with legislation – Public interest – Judicial review – Jurisdiction – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Wilcock v. Ontario (Health Professions Appeal and ...

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal of the Worker’s Compensation Board and restored its decision to compensate an injured worker based on calculations made under a new policy implemented under the Workers’ Compensation Act

27. March 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers Compensation – Benefits – Statutory provisions – Policies – Validity and application of policies and guidelines – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Mellor v. Saskatchewan (Workers’ Compensation Board), [2012] S.J. No. 57, 2012 SKCA ...

The court allowed the applicant’s habeas corpus application and thereby ordered the applicant to be transferred back to his previous medium-security facility. A writ of habeas corpus is issued as of right where the applicant establishes there is cause to doubt the lawful nature of his detention. The respondents conceded that the transfer to a higher security level institution constituted a deprivation of residual liberty, and thus the onus rested with the respondents to demonstrate the legality of their decision to transfer the applicant. The respondents failed to prove that the statutory and common law standards of procedural fairness, and in particular, the obligation to make full disclosure to the plaintiff, were met in regard to the transfer decision.

27. July 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Prisons – Transfer of inmates – Remedies – Habeas corpus – Statutory provisions – Judicial review – Evidence – Disclosure – Procedural requirements and fairness – Compliance with legislation – Jurisdiction Khela v. Mission Institution, [2010] B.C.J. No 971, 2010 BCSC 721, British Columbia Supreme Court, May ...

A man (“Conway”) who had been found not guilty by reason of insanity on a charge of sexual assault with a weapon was unsuccessful in his attempt to have the Ontario Review Board grant him an absolute discharge as a s.24(1) Charter remedy

27. July 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Review Board – Mental health facility – Treatment plans – Review Board authority –  Remedies – Charter relief – Availability – Boards and tribunals – Jurisdiction to grant Charter remedies – Prisons – Inmates not criminally responsible for their crimes – Public safety – Statutory provisions – ...

The Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal does not have the residual discretion to reject applications for an extension of time under s. 243(3) of the Workers Compensation Act once the two statutory criteria set out in that provision are met

22. June 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers compensation – Extention of time – Judicial review – Jurisdiction – Statutory provisions – Standard of review – Correctness – Compliance with legislation Kerton v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal), 2010 B.C.J. No. 830, 2010 BCSC 644, British Columbia Supreme Court, May 5, 2010, E. ...

The Dispute Resolution and Decision Review Body, an internal review board of the Workers’ Compensation Board, does not have the jurisdiction to reconsider its own decision. Likewise, the Board’s Appeals Commission does not have the jurisdiction to consider issues that are not under appeal.

22. June 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers compensation – Tribunal’s power to consider its own decisions – Judicial review – Jurisdiction – Statutory provisions – Standard of review – Correctness – Compliance with legislation Watson v. Alberta (Workers’ Compensation Board), [2010] A.J. No. 485, 2010 ABQB 280, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, April ...

The Appellant facility was successful in arguing, on this appeal, that the Review Board’s disposition was unreasonable and in error because it failed to address the need for interim measures for the detainee, Mr. Rea. There was no practical remedy because the issue was moot.

27. April 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Review Board – Prisons – Transfer of inmates – Statutory provisions – Criminal Code – Mental health facility – Interim measures – Judicial review – Mootness Mental Health Centre Penetanguishene v. Ontario, [2010] O.J. No. 1044, 2010 ONCA 197, Ontario Court of Appeal, March 16, 2010, R.P. ...