The application by Doe for judicial review of an Order of the Assistant Commissioner of the RCMP to terminate his protection under the Witness Protection Program was allowed and the Assistant Commissioner’s decision terminating witness protection was quashed

25. April 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Royal Canadian Mounted Police – Witness Protection Program – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness – Witnesses – Standard of review – Correctness John Doe v. Canada (Attorney General), [2006] F.C.J. No. 241, Federal Court, January 27, 2006, Phelan J. Doe became aware of criminal activities which ...

An Application to quash an interim Order made by the Respondent Human Rights Tribunal requiring the Applicants to call as witnesses persons whom the Applicants did not wish to call and to produce “will-say” statements from those persons was allowed. The Tribunal’s Order was a clear breach of the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness to the Applicants and, potentially, to the witnesses and was therefore set aside. Natural justice and procedural fairness required that the parties be free to conduct their own cases.

28. March 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Hearings – Compellability of witness – Judicial review – Witnesses – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence Universal Workers Union, Labourers’ International Union of North America Local 183 v. Ontario (Human Rights Commission), [2006] O.J. No. 50, Ontario Superior Court of Justice ...

A dentist (“Dr. Sigesmund”) with a practice restricted to the treatment of temporomandibular joint disorders was partially successful in his appeal from a decision of the Discipline Committee of the Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario (the “College”) where he was originally found guilty of multiple counts of professional misconduct

27. September 2005 0
Administrative law – Dentists – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Dental Surgeons – Judicial review – Witnesses – Bias – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Sigesmund v. Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario, [2005] O.J. No. 3267, Ontario Superior Court of ...

The Court allowed an appeal by the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers’ Marketing Board and reinstated a decision of the Respondent’s Appeal Tribunal which had found the Respondent, Stetler, guilty of engaging in the unlawful sale of tobacco outside the auspices of the Board’s quota system. The reviewing judge had erred in failing to properly determine the appropriate standard of review applicable to the Tribunal’s decision and by applying a standard of correctness rather than reasonableness.

23. August 2005 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Marketing Boards – Penalties – Judicial review – Evidence – Witnesses – Bias – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Correctness Stetler v. Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal, [2005] O.J. No. 2817, Ontario Court of Appeal, July 8, 2005, S. Borins, K.N. Feldman and E.A. ...

A former RCMP cadet and Muslim (“Tahmourpour”) successfully appealed from the dismissal of his human rights complaint on the basis that the investigator had failed to investigate obviously crucial evidence and had thereby breached the duty of fairness. The matter was remitted back to the Human Rights Commission.

28. June 2005 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Investigations – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Witnesses Tahmourpour v. Canada (Solicitor General), [2005] F.C.J. No. 543, Federal Court of Appeal, April 6, 2005, Rothstein, Sexton and Evan JJ.A. Tahmourpour, a Canadian citizen of Middle Eastern ...

The appeal from a decision which found the appellant guilty of professional misconduct in relation to allegations of inappropriate sexual activity with a student was dismissed as there was evidence before the Panel to support the conclusion that the appellant had engaged in such activity

25. January 2005 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Teachers – Teachers – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Evidence – Witnesses X. v. British Columbia College of Teachers, [2004] B.C.J. No. 2528, British Columbia Supreme Court, December 3, 2004, Cole J. The ...

The court found a reasonable apprehension of bias to exist in circumstances where a physician testified at a College disciplinary hearing as both a fact and expert witness and was subsequently appointed to be a member of the College Discipline Committee shortly before the decision pertaining to the hearing at which she gave evidence was released

28. December 2004 0
Administrative law – Physicians and Surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct – Penalties and suspensions – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Committee members – Impartiality – Judicial review – Witnesses – Bias – Disclosure – Procedural requirements and fairness Li v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, [2004] O.J. ...

J.M.D.’s appeal of the dismissal of her claim for compensation pursuant to the Victims’ Rights and Services Act was allowed by the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal. The court held that the N.S. Utility and Review Board erred in the manner in which it considered and disposed of evidence of a witness tendered as similar fact evidence.

28. December 2004 0
Administrative law – Judicial review – Administrative decisions – Review Board – Evidence – Witnesses – Similar fact evidence admissibility J.M.D. v. Nova Scotia (Utility and Review Board), [2004] N.S.J. No. 400, Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, October 28, 2004, Glube C.J.N.S. J.M.D. claimed that, when she was a nursing student in Halifax in the mid-60s, ...

The Lunenburg County District School Board (the “School Board”) appealed the decision of the Supreme Court quashing a decision by the Board of Appeal dismissing a teacher (“Haché”) charged with sexual offences against his students. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal holding that the evidence relied on by the Board of Appeal was not capable of supporting the evidence of the complainants.

25. May 2004 0
Administrative law – Teachers – Disciplinary proceedings – Decisions of administrative tribunals – School boards – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence – Witnesses Haché v. Lunenburg County District School Board, [2004] N.S.J. No. 120, Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, March 30, 2004, Glube C.J.N.S., Freeman and Cromwell JJ.A. In 1995, the School Board ...

A physician (“Dr. Young”) successfully appealed both the decision of the Disciplinary Hearing Committee (the “Committee”) of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan (the “College”) in which he was found guilty of unbecoming, improper, unprofessional or discreditable conduct and the associated penalty

23. March 2004 0
Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Evidence – Reliability – Witnesses – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Young v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan, [2004] S.J. No. 21, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, January 13, 2004, Koch J. Dr. Young was ...