A taxi operator appealed the decision of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal which had found that he had discriminated against a disabled man by refusing to provide taxi service to him. The court dismissed the appeal, finding that the Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear and determine the complaint, and award costs against the Appellant. The court also rejected the Appellant’s allegation of bias on the part of the Tribunal member.

24. February 2009 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Disability – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Jurisdiction – Right to award costs – Judicial review – Bias – Test – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Correctness Sahota v. Scott, [2008] S.J. No. 836, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, ...

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 University of Manitoba (the “University”) unsuccessfully brought a motion seeking summary dismissal of an action commenced by a former dentistry student (“Hozaima”) on the basis that the Court lacked jurisdiction or that the claim represented an abuse of process. The motion was dismissed.

23. September 2008 0
Administrative law – Universities – Students – Assessment of grades – Evaluation – Educational malpractice – Abuse of process – test – Jurisdiction Hozaima v. Perry, [2008] M.J. No. 268, Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench, July 10, 2008, M.M. Monnin C.J.Q.B. Hozaima was a dentistry student at the University and was forced to resign from ...

The Federal Court found a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of a commissioner of inquiry on the basis of the commissioner’s repeated inappropriate statements to the media. The media is not an appropriate forum in which a decision-maker should become engaged while presiding over a commission of inquiry, a trial, or any other type of hearing or proceeding. The only appropriate forum in which a decision-maker is to become engaged is within the hearing room of the very proceeding over which he or she is presiding.

26. August 2008 0
Administrative law – Investigative bodies – Commission of Inquiry – Commissioner – Reasonable apprehension of bias – Test – Evidence – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness Chretien v. Canada (Commission of Inquiry into the Sponsorship Program and Advertising Activities, Gomery Commission), [2008] F.C.J. No. 973, 2008 FC 802, Federal Court, June 26, 2008, ...

An application for judicial review of two decisions of the Manitoba Board of Adjudictation which upheld complaints filed by twin sisters that they had suffered discrimination on the basis of gender by being denied an opportunity to try out for the male hockey team at their school. The Court dismissed the application and upheld the decision of the Manitoba Board of Adjudication.

25. March 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Board of Adjudication – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Test – Gender – Judicial review -Jurisdiction of tribunal – Standard of review – Correctness – Reasonableness simpliciter Manitoba High Schools Athletic Association Inc. v. Pasternak, [2008] M.J. No. 10, Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench, January 21, ...

A lawyer (Merchant) successfully obtained an order quashing a decision of the Law Society of Alberta (“Law Society”) disbarring him, on the basis that there was a reasonable apprehension of bias due to an ex parte communication between the chair of the hearing committee and a witness

22. January 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Law Societies – Barristers and solicitors – Disciplinary proceedings – Penalties and suspensions – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Bias – Reasonable apprehension of bias – test – Witnesses – Compliance with legislation – Remedies – Alternative remedies Merchant v. Law Society of Alberta, ...

The Alberta Court of Appeal held that the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Commission (“WCA”) was patently unreasonable in its finding as to when a worker’s accident ceased to be the cause of the worker’s injury. Workers’ Compensation Policy ADJ-39 is properly interpreted as to only require a disability to be the result of an emotional reaction, not that the injury be an emotional reaction. WCA’s analysis was unreasonable because it limited coverage by relying on factors that the Policy requires to be used to extend coverage.

28. August 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers compensation – Psychological injury – employment related – Test – Benefits – Judicial review – Evidence – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Correctness Shuchuk v. Alberta (Workers’ Compensation Board, Appeals Commission), [2007] A.J. No. 725, Alberta Court of Appeal, July 10, ...

The Committee for Justice for Otto Vass (“CJOV”) was unsuccessful in its application for judicial review of the decision of the Coroner, Dr. William Lucas, refusing it standing at a Coroner’s Inquest where the Court found that the Coroner had not erred in concluding that CJOV met neither the private law nor the public law test for standing

23. January 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Coroner’s inquest – Judicial review – Parties – Standing – Test – Public interest – Bias Vass (Committee for Justice) v. Lucas, [2006] O.J. No. 4553, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, October 26, 2006, K.E. Swinton J Otto Vass died on August 9, 2000 after being restrained by police ...

After an inspection found that funeral contracts offered by Strong did not contain a detailed listing of the goods and services to be provided, and following on a complaint to the Board that Strong and his assistant were personally signing cremation authorizations forms rather than having a personal representative of the deceased do so, Strong’s licence was suspended by the Alberta Funeral Services Regulatory Board (the “Board”). Strong appealed, and the Appeal Board substituted a six-month license suspension and a reprimand. The Board appealed to the Court of Queen’s Bench which dismissed the appeal.

23. January 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Funeral Services – Permits and licences – Suspensions – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Test – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Alberta (Funeral Services Regulatory Board) v. Strong, [2006] A.J. No 558, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, December 5, 2006, Ross J. The first question ...

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 ...