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 ...

A person who is subject to an ascertained forfeiture under the Customs Act may not avail himself of the right against self-incrimination guaranteed by section 11(c) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms since that person is not charged with an offence

25. January 2005 0
Administrative law – Charter of Rights – Self-incrimination in administrative proceedings Normand Martineau v. Minister of National Revenue, [2004] S.C.J. 58, Supreme Court of Canada, December 16, 2004, McLachlin C.J. and Major, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ. In June 1996, a customs officer demanded that the appellant pay $315,458, the deemed ...

The Court dismissed the Province’s application for an order to stay part of the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal’s order requiring payment to the Respondents, pending a decision of the Court on judicial review

25. January 2005 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Disability – Family members as care givers – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Judicial review application – Stay of proceedings – Test British Columbia v. Hutchinson, [2004] B.C.J. No. 2434, British Columbia Supreme Court, November 24, 2004, Ralph J. The British Columbia Human Rights ...

A decision made by a Panel of the College of Dental Surgeons of British Columbia was remitted back to the Panel for reconsideration and determination of the appropriate penalty after the Court held that it was inappropriate for the Panel to decide, in the face of submissions from both parties that the appropriate penalty was suspension and cancellation of the member’s registration as a dentist in British Columbia

25. January 2005 0
Administrative law – Dentists – Disciplinary proceedings – Penalties – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Dental Surgeons – Judicial review – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness Gavrilko v. College of Dental Surgeons of British Columbia, [2004] B.C.J. No. 2437, British Columbia Supreme Court, November 24, 2004, Williamson J. The Appellant dentist appealed the ...

The Court held that the Workers’ Compensation Board (“WCB”) was not entitled to withhold payment of a 1989 continuing award because of the worker’s 1991 receipt of settlement funds from his employer

25. January 2005 0
Administrative law – Workers compensation – Benefits – Statutory provisions – Statutory interpretation – Damages – Settlement monies from other jurisdictions – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Judicial review – Jurisdiction – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Correctness Dipersio v. Nova Scotia (Workers’ Compensation Appeals Tribunal), [2004] N.S.J. No. 442, Nova ...

The Court allowed an appeal of a judicial review application concerning a decision of the Chairperson of the P.E.I. Human Rights Commission to affirm the Commission’s dismissal of the Applicant’s human rights complaint. The Court ordered the Chairperson of the Commission to appoint a Human Rights Panel to deal with the Appellant’s complaint.

25. January 2005 0
Administrative law – Judicial review application – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission executive director powers – Human Rights complaints – Discrimination Ayangma v. Prince Edward Island (Human Rights Commission), [2004] P.E.I.J. No. 84, Prince Edward Island Supreme Court – Appeal Division, November 12, 2004, Mitchell C.J.P.E.I., ...

The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed this appeal of the Divisional Court’s decision on a judicial review of a decision of Ontario’s Information and Privacy Commissioner. The Court of Appeal upheld the Commissioner’s decision with respect to section 21(5) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and the test to be applied when the head of a Provincial institution, who cannot disclose the contents of a record because that would constitute an unjustified invasion of personal privacy, seeks to respond to a request for information by refusing to confirm or deny the very existence of the record.

25. January 2005 0
Administrative law – Freedom of information and protection of privacy – Privacy commissioner – Disclosure – Invasion of personal privacy – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Ontario (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care) v. Ontario (Assistant Information and Privacy Commissioner), [2004] O.J. No. 4813, Ontario Court of Appeal, ...

The court held that the Minister’s determination that there had not been a previous commitment to the Appellant with respect to a snow crab licence and that the condition respecting commencement of the processing operations had not been met were contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence and ought to be set aside. The matter was remitted back to the Minister for reconsideration.

28. December 2004 0
Administrative law – Fisheries – Permits and licences – Compliance with legislation – Powers under legislation – Abuse of ministerial discretion – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Ministerial orders – Judicial review – Evidence – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness St. Anthony Seafoods Limited Partnership v. Newfoundland and Labrador (Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture), [2004] N.J. No. 336, ...

The misconduct convictions imposed by the Respondent were upheld on appeal as the Court held that the Panel was not unreasonable in the exercise of its statutory duty. However, the costs award ordered against the Appellant exceeded the bounds of reasonableness and was set aside.

28. December 2004 0
Administrative law – Nurses – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Penalties – Judicial review – Administrative decisions – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Costs Filipchuk v. College of Licensed Practical Nurses of Manitoba, [2004] M.J. No. 367, Manitoba Court of Appeal, September 29, 2004, Twaddle, Kroft and Monnin JJ.A. A statutory ...

The Development Appeal Board’s confirmation of the Development Officer’s approval of a development permit was allowed as the City, without bad faith or obfuscation, misled the public with respect to the implementation of the amendment to a zoning bylaw

28. December 2004 0
Administrative law – Municipalities – Planning and zoning – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Public interest – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Boyd v. Yellowknife (City), [2004] N.W.T.J. No. 49, Northwest Territories Supreme Court, August 20, 2004, Lutz J. The Appellant appealed the Development Appeal Board’s decision confirming ...