The Nova Scotia Supreme Court held that a regulation which sets a maximum value for milk quota was intra vires and valid as being a lawful exercise of statutory authority

25. January 2011 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Dairy Farmers – Powers under legislation – Milk quotas – Legislation – Validity of legislation – Ultra vires – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation Taylor v. Dairy Farmers of Nova Scotia, [2010] N.S.J. No. 624, 2010 NSSC 436, Nova Scotia Supreme Court, November 25, 2010, P.J. ...

The Court of Appeal allowed an Appeal of a decision of the B.C. Supreme Court, which had found that a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal, that the Appellant was injured in the course of his employment, was patently unreasonable. In making its finding, the Court of Appeal found that the B.C. Legislature had not, by enacting sections 58 and 59 of the Administrative Tribunal’s Act, stepped outside its legislative competence and infringed on a constitutional guarantee of judicial review for the superior courts. Moreover, the effect of the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick was not to change the meaning of patently unreasonable. The application judge, while referring to the correct approach to factual issues, impermissibly weighed the evidence and moved outside the definition of patently unreasonable.

Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers Compensation – Worker – definition – Legislation – Constitutional issues – Ultra vires – Judicial review – Jurisdiction of court – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness – Evidence Manz v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal), [2009] B.C.J. No. 464, British ...

The Applicant trailer park owner applied for judicial review of a bylaw passed by the Respondent City, which implemented a licensing fee for the owners of trailer parks. The Court held that the bylaw was ultra vires of the licensing authority granted to the City because the fee was intended as a tax.

Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Municipal councils – Municipalities – Powers under legislation – By-laws – Ultra vires – Power to enact by-laws – Permits and licences – Fees – Service fees – Property assessment – Trailer parks – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation Gould v. Weyburn (City), [2009] S.J. No. ...

The Petitioner, Asquini, brought a judicial review application in respect of the decision made by the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal (WCAT). The WCAT had denied the Petitioner’s appeal of the Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB) decision to deny him a loss of earnings pension. The Petitioner argued that the WCAT decision should be quashed for several reasons, including an argument that the vice chair in the WCAT was biased and there were errors in interpreting WCB policies. The Petition was dismissed.

Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Benefits – Pensions – Eligibility – Legislation – Constitutional issues – Ultra vires – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Bias Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Asquini v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal), [2009] B.C.J. No. 89, British Columbia Supreme ...

The court held that a section of a by-law, which authorized an animal control officer to destroy a dog based on his belief that it had attacked another animal, was ultra vires the Municipality. The court quashed a decision purportedly made by a municipal officer in reliance on the section, and also held that the officer owed a duty of fairness to the dog owner, that he had not discharged, and which provided a further basis on which to quash the decision.

24. February 2009 0
Administrative law – Municipalities – Animal control – By-laws – Validity – Ultra vires – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Procedural requirements and fairness – Remedies – Certiorari Rogier v. Halifax (Regional Municipality), [2009] N.S.J. No. 19, Nova Scotia Supreme Court, January 16, 2009, D.R. Beveridge J. The Applicant applied for judicial review ...

There is no unfettered right to possess firearms in Canada, notwithstanding the preamble of the British North America Act, 1867, which the applicant suggested incorporated the English Bill of Rights, 1689, allowing Protestant subjects to have firearms for their defence. There was a legislative history in Canada that heavily regulated gun ownership, and s.117.03 of the Criminal Code, allowing for seizure and destruction of an unlicensed firearm was intra vires the federal Parliament, as the regulation of the possession of a firearm was within the sphere of its criminal law power. This provision did not violate the applicant’s rights under ss.7 and 26 of the Charter, and there was no evidentiary basis that the applicant needed the firearm for his personal security. There was also no breach of the applicant’s fundamental justice, even if the 1689 Bill of Rights was part of the Canadian Constitution, s.26 of the Charter did not guarantee the rights therein.

22. April 2008 0
Administrative law – Firearms registration – Legislation – Criminal code – Ultra vires – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Right to bear arms Hudson v. Canada (Attorney General), [2007] S.J. No. 693, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, December 12, 2007, N.G. Gabrielson J. The applicant, a doctor ...

An application for judicial review seeking a declaration that subsection 41(b.1) of the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations, SOR/2001-227 (“MMAR”) is invalid, and that the matter be referred back to the Minister of Health for reconsideration and that the Court retain supervisory jurisdiction over Health Canada’s implementation of a revised process for allowing a single designated producer of medical marijuana to produce for more than one medical user. The Court held that subsection 41(b.1) was a restriction on the Applicants’ Section 7 liberty and security rights in the Charter, that could not be saved by section 1. The matter was referred back to the Minister of Health for reconsideration consistent with the Court’s reasons, but the Court declined to retain supervisory jurisdiction.

Administrative law – Medicinal use of marijuana – Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Life liberty or security of the person – Validity of legislation – Judicial review application – Standard of review – Correctness – Compliance with legislation – Legislation – Ultra vires Sfetkopoulos v. Canada (Attorney General), [2008] F.C.J. No. 6, Federal Court ...

The appeal by a manufacturer of “sandwich panels” used in the construction of solariums or sunrooms (“Craft-Bilt”) of the refusal of the Chief Building Officer of the City of Toronto to issue building permits for three properties was allowed where the Court found that it was beyond the power of the municipality to eliminate a means of approval for materials and design that was mandated by the Legislature

23. January 2007 0
Administrative law – Municipalities – Permits and licences – Building permits – Powers under legislation – Legislation – Ultra vires – review – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Correctness Craft-Bilt Materials, Ltd. v. Toronto (City), [2006] O.J. No. 4710, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, November 15, 2006, H.M. Pierce J. Craft-Bilt sought to use ...

An application for judicial review of a Bylaw passed by the Respondent City of Red Deer to regulate drinking establishments was dismissed. The Bylaw was not ultra vires the Municipal Government Act. The City enacted the Bylaw for municipal purposes and without ulterior motive. The Bylaw did not confer unlimited or illegal power. The Bylaw did not result in a duplication of powers under the Gaming and Liquor Act because that legislation did not address safety concerns that were particular to a specific community. The delegation permitted by the Bylaw was administrative and was therefore legal.

28. November 2006 0
Administrative law – Municipalities – Legislation – By-laws – Ultra vires – Permits and licences – Fees – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Powers of delegated authority – Jurisdiction – Standard of review – Correctness Passutto Hotels (1984) Ltd. v. Red Deer (City), [2006] A.J. No. 1100, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, September 5, 2006. ...

The Court quashed the Respondent’s decision to deny benefits to the developmentally and intellectually disabled Petitioner. By structuring its decision on an IQ criteria, the Respondent had acted outside of its jurisdiction and had fettered its own discretion.

Administrative law – Administrative decisions – Community Living authority – Legislation – Validity – Ultra vires – Unlawful delegation of power – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation N.F. (Guardian Ad Litem of) v. Community Living B.C., [2006] B.C.J. No. 1331, British Columbia Supreme Court, June 12, 2006, Chamberlist J. The Petitioner was 19 years of ...