Does the Human Rights Commission have to provide reasons when dismissing a complaint? When is it appropriate on judicial review for the court to permit evidence that was not before the original decision-maker? These were some of the central questions that were before the Nova Scotia Supreme Court after the applicant filed a complaint against her employer saying that she was constructively dismissed due to a failure to accommodate her disability.

16. November 2018 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Human Rights Commission – Judicial review – Evidence – Failure to provide reasons – Standard of review – Reasonableness – Human rights complaints – Disability Kelly v. Nova Scotia (Human Rights Commission), [2018] N.S.J. No. 336, 2018 NSSC 173, Nova Scotia Supreme Court, September 11, 2018, J.M. Arnold J. ...

The appellant, a member of the Fredericton Police Force was caught stealing while in the United States. She was never convicted, but the charges were not dismissed either. At the same time as this was unfolding, a formal complaint was initiated through her employer. The matter proceeded to arbitration where she was dismissed from her employment with the Fredericton Police Force, the arbitrator citing her breach of trust as the primary reason for the termination. The appellant sought to quash the arbitrator’s decision on judicial review for both procedural and substantive reasons.

16. November 2018 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Arbitration Board – Professional governance and discipline – Judicial review – Appeals – Standard of review – Reasonableness – Police – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming Campbell v. Fredericton (City) Police Force, [2018] N.B.J. No. 197, 2018 NBCA 54, New Brunswick Court of Appeal, September 6, 2018, J.C.M. Richard, ...

The Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform, a pro-life advocacy group, was denied advertising space on public buses by the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority for one of its campaigns aimed at demonizing women who have an abortion. It argued that the refusal constituted an unreasonable infringement on its Charter right to freedom of expression. The decision of TransLink was upheld by the chamber’s judge on judicial review, but ultimately overturned by the Court of Appeal, primarily on the basis of its failure to properly address the Charter argument. The Court of Appeal remitted the matter back to TransLink for reconsideration.

16. November 2018 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Transportation Authority – Human Rights – Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Judicial review – Appeals – Fresh evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness – Proportionality Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform v. South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority, [2018] B.C.J. No. 3156, 2018 BCCA 344, British Columbia Court ...

This case considers the appropriateness of advancing new arguments on judicial review, not considered by the original decision-maker, and how the court ought to address those issues. The appellant in this case advanced new Charter arguments that were first raised with the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal concluded it would be inappropriate for it to hear these arguments for the first time without a complete factual record. The matter was remitted back to a new panel for consideration.

21. August 2018 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Human Rights Tribunal – Judicial review – Appeals – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Correctness – Human rights complaints – Religion – Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Discrimination Webber Academy Foundation v. Alberta (Human Rights Commission Director), [2018] A.J. No. 689, 2018 ABCA 207, ...

This case involves judicial review of a decision of the Landlord and Tenancy Board, and subsequent decision of the chamber’s judge upholding that decision, in which the Board granted an application to evict the appellants on the basis that their conduct was impairing the safety of others at a mobile home complex. The primary argument advanced was that the appellants did not have proper notice of the grounds for eviction. The court rejected this argument and affirmed the decision of the Board.

21. August 2018 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Landlord and Tenancy Board – Fresh evidence – Judicial review – Appeals – Procedural requirements and fairness – Landlord and tenant – Eviction 2276761 Ontario Inc. v. Overall, [2018] O.J. No. 2730, 2018 ONSC 3264, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, May 24, 2018, R.J. Harper, F.L. Myers and W.D. ...

This case involves judicial review of a decision of the Residential Tenancy Branch finding that a non-profit community housing guest policy was discriminatory and harmed the residents. The court dismissed the judicial review, finding that the Tribunal’s decision was reasonable.

21. August 2018 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Residential Tenancy office – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness – Landlord and tenant – Residential tenancy agreements PHS Community Services Society v. Swait, [2018] B.C.J. No. 958, 2018 BCSC 824, British Columbia Supreme Court, May 18, 2018, N. Sharma J. ...

The appellant high school teacher appealed a finding of professional misconduct made against him, and the resulting penalty, arising from interactions that he had with students and health unit staff at a school immunization clinic; court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the misconduct finding and penalty

17. April 2018 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – College of Teachers – Teachers – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Penalties – Appeals – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness Sullivan v. Ontario College of Teachers, [2018] O.J. No. 705, 2018 ONSC 942, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, February 7, 2018, W.M. ...

Appellant’s appeal of a decision of the Federal Court, in which it dismissed the appellants’ application for judicial review of three decisions from the Canadian Intellectual Property Office relating to an application for a patent, dismissed

17. April 2018 0
Administrative law – Appeals – Decisions reviewed – Intellectual Property Office – Intellectual property – Patents – Judicial review – Discretion of delegated authority Governors of the University of Alberta v. Canada (Attorney General), [2018] F.C.J. No. 160, 2018 FCA 36, Federal Court of Appeal, February 9, 2018, W.W. Webb, D.G. Near and J.B. Laskin ...

Addressing the doctrine of legitimate expectations in the context of an investigation and report into a harassment complaint, the Court found the applicant had a legitimate expectation based on a representation made and that this was never fulfilled; the matter was remitted back for reconsideration

17. April 2018 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Human rights complaints – Harassment – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Unreasonableness – Natural justice Gareau v. Canada (Attorney General), [2018] F.C.J. No. 135, 2018 FC 157, Federal Court, February 9, 2018, A.M. McDonald J. The applicant, Paul Gareau, was the Deputy ...