A teacher with the Scarborough Board of Education (“Layzell”) unsuccessfully applied for judicial review of decisions of the Ontario Human Rights Commission (the “Commission”) regarding complaints she had filed alleging discrimination and reprisal based on her sex and disability as an individual afflicted by multiple sclerosis

23. March 2004 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Teachers – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Duty to accommodate – Judicial review application – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness – Procedural requirements and fairness Layzell v. Ontario (Human Rights Commission), [2003] O.J. No. 5448, Ontario Superior Court of Justice – Divisional Court, January ...

A former school teacher (“Lurette”) who had been terminated from his employment after an investigation into a complaint alleging that he had engaged in sexual conduct with a student successfully applied for judicial review to quash the Board of Adjudication’s decision upholding the Province of New Brunswick’s decision to have him dismissed. Lurette alleged that the role of the Chair of the Board of Adjudication (“Poirier”) as an employee of the Service New Brunswick subsequent to the hearing but prior to the Board of Adjudication’s decision being rendered, created a reasonable apprehension of bias.

25. November 2003 0
Administrative law – Teachers – Disciplinary proceedings – Adjudication – Judicial review – Reasonable apprehension of bias – test – Procedural fairness – Natural justice Lurette v. New Brunswick (Minister of Education), [2003] N.B.J. No. 353, New Brunswick Court of Queen’s Bench, September 19, 2003, Young J. The court reviewed the principles of fundamental justice as including ...

Mrs. Lewis appealed the Director of the Department of Labour’s decision cancelling an officer’s decision that the School Board had wrongfully discriminated against the appellant. In 1996, Mrs. Lewis suspected that the cause of her health problems arose from the modular classroom to which she had recently been assigned and complained to the Board of Education. The Board declared that the classroom was safe. Mrs. Lewis filed a complaint with the Occupational Health and Safety Division of the Department of Labour, claiming that the Board had discriminated against her by failing to find her a new classroom. The tribunal held that the Board had failed to provide good and sufficient reasons for its failure to provide an alternative classroom. The Board appealed the decision and was successful on appeal. Mrs. Lewis appealed to the Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, who held that the adjudicator committed no error in concluding that there was no discriminatory action by the Board against Mrs. Lewis. Mrs. Lewis’ appeal was dismissed.

28. October 2003 0
Administrative law – Labour law – Working conditions – Schools – Teachers – Discrimination Lewis v. Regional School Division No. 4, [2003] S.J. No. 526, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, July 31, 2003, Matheson J. After being assigned to the modular classroom in 1996, Mrs. Lewis began to experience persistent health problems. Her family doctor ...

The Board of School Trustees of School District No. 81 (the “School Board”) was successful in its appeal of an arbitration award in which the arbitrator found that the benefit plan of the School Board (the “Plan”) was discriminatory under section 15(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the British Columbia Human Rights Code, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 210 in restricting dual coverage where both spouses were teachers. The court found that the Plan was not discriminatory as there was no deprivation of a benefit.

26. August 2003 0
Administrative law – Teachers – Labour law – Arbitration – Benefit plans – Dual coverage – Judicial review – Human rights complaints – Charter of Rights – Discrimination British Columbia Public School Employers’ Assn. v. British Columbia Teachers’ Federation, [2003] B.C.J. No. 1272, British Columbia Court of Appeal, May 30, 2003, Huddart, Braidwood and Thackray JJ.A. The Fort Nelson ...

A teacher applied for judicial review of a hearing committee’s decision of professional misconduct. The Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench dismissed the case; however, the Alberta Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and set aside the findings of professional misconduct concluding that the decision of the hearing committee was unreasonable and improper.

24. December 2002 0
Administrative law – Teachers – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Schools – Parental rights Eggertson v. Alberta Teachers’ Assn., [2002] A.J. No. 1358, Alberta Court of Appeal, November 5, 2002, O’Leary, Costigan and Paperny JJ.A. The Appellant was a teacher with the Calgary ...

Dufault, a teacher and Human Resources Superintendent for a school district, was unsuccessful in overturning a decision by an investigative subcommittee of the British Columbia College of Teachers to issue a citation against him with respect to his involvement in hiring a teacher without certification from the College

28. May 2002 0
Administrative law – Teachers – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming of member – Investigative bodies – Jurisdiction Dufault v. British Columbia College of Teachers, [2002] B.C.J. No. 864, British Columbia Supreme Court, April 25, 2002, Ross J. Dufault was the Associate Superintendent of Human Resources for the School District of Abbotsford. He was ...