College of Physicians of Alberta failed to afford an internationally trained physician adequate procedural fairness

15. October 2019 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Professions – Physicians and surgeons – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Reasonableness Mohamed v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta, [2019] A.J. No. 1134, 2019 ABQB 657, Alberta Court of Queen’s ...

A decision to grant or refuse public interest standing is a discretionary decision and is afforded appellate deference. The Court of Appeal affirmed the chambers judge decision, finding that the chambers judge correctly identified and expressly addressed each of the applicable factors when exercising his discretion to decide not to grant public interest standing to the appellants.

Administrative law – Judicial review – Standing – Parties – Appeals Zoocheck Canada Inc. v. Alberta (Minister of Agriculture and Forestry), [2019] A.J. No. 666, 2019 ABCA 208, Alberta Court of Appeal, May 24, 2019, B.K. O’Ferrall, T.W. Wakeling and J. Strekaf JJ.A. The applicants’ concern was with the care of an elephant named Lucy, ...

Court determined that limitation period for judicial review of administrative decisions in New Brunswick begins when the affected parties are notified of the decision or when there is “public availability” of the decision, not from the date of the decision itself.

Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Human Rights Commission – Judicial review – Application – Appeals – Limitations Laliberté v. Kedgwick (Rural Community), [2019] N.B.J. No. 116, 2019 NBCA 38, New Brunswick Court of Appeal, May 16, 2019, J.C.M. Richard, M.E.L. Larlee and K.A. Quigg JJ.A. In New Brunswick, judicial review of administrative action is governed ...

A professional regulatory body erred in its application of the law when assessing whether collateral police evidence was admissible

16. April 2019 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – College of Veterinarians – Judicial review – Appeals – Evidence – admissibility – Standard of review – Correctness – Veterinarians – Disciplinary proceedings College of Veterinarians of Ontario v. Choong, [2019] O.J. No. 837, 2019 ONSC 946, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, February 20, 2019, G.B. Morawetz R.S.J., C.J. Horkins ...

A tribunal reasonably declined an adjournment and reasonably proceeded with one hearing on liability and penalty

16. April 2019 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – University Appeal Board – Adjournment of hearing – Judicial review – Appeals – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Reasonableness-  Universities – Student discipline Spence v. University of Toronto, [2019] O.J. No. 877, 2019 ONSC 1085, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, February 21, 2019, K.E. Swinton, ...

Agricultural Land Commission’s interpretation of legislation was unreasonable

15. January 2019 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Agricultural Land Commission – Municipalities – Planning and zoning – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness Guse v. Provincial Agricultural Land Commission, [2018] B.C.J. No. 3624, 2018 BCSC 1983, British Columbia Supreme Court, November 9, 2018, R.J. Sewell J. The Agricultural Land Commission ...

Municipal Council’s consultative process was held to be procedurally fair

15. January 2019 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Municipal boards – By-laws – Notice and consultation – Judicial review – Bias – Procedural requirements and fairness West Nipissing (Municipality) Police Services Board v. West Nipissing (Municipality), [2018] O.J. No. 5958, 2018 ONSC 6454, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, November 14, 2018, H.S. Arrell R.S.J., G.M. Mulligan, W.M. Matheson ...

A reporter requested access to information pursuant to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F31 (the “Act”) relating to the top 100 physician billers under the Ontario Health Insurance Program, a breakdown of the physician’s specialties and the amount billed

16. October 2018 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Privacy Commissioner – Compliance with legislation – Freedom of information and protection of privacy – Disclosure of records – Judicial review – Appeals – Standard of review – Reasonableness Ontario Medical Assn. v. Ontario (Information and Privacy Commissioner), [2018] O.J. No. 4107, 2018 ONCA 673, Ontario Court of Appeal, ...

The appellant, Dr. Hefnawi, was enrolled in the Medical Services Plan (“MSP”). In 2010, he was audited by the Billing Integrity Program (“BIP”). The Medical Services Commission (the “Commission”) sought recovery of funds for fraudulent or mispresented patient billing and gave notice of its intention to cancel the appellants enrolment as a practitioner under the Medicare Protection Act, RSBC 1996, c. 286 (“MPA”).

16. October 2018 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Ministry of Health Billing Integrity Program – Judicial review – Appeals – Natural Justice – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence – Physicians and surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Billing matters – Records Hefnawi v Health Care Practitioners Special Committee for Audit Hearings, [2018] B.C.J. No. 2932, 2018 BCSC ...