A minister of the United Church (“Graham”) was unsuccessful in her application seeking judicial review of a decision by the Saskatchewan Conference of the Church (the “Conference”) to conduct a formal disciplinary hearing into Graham’s actions as a minister. The court held that the Conference was entitled to proceed despite the fact that decisions from an earlier “care and oversight” review by the Presbytery had been quashed, as the Conference had concurrent jurisdiction with Presbytery to conduct such a review and defects in the prior procedure could be cured by initiating a fresh process.

28. January 2003 0
Religious organizations – Governance – Church ministers – Disciplinary proceedings – Suspensions – Hearings – Judicial review – Breach of procedural fairness – Natural justice – Jurisdiction Graham v. United Church of Canada, [2002] S.J. No. 596, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, November 15, 2002, Foley J. Graham was a minister of the United Church of Canada. ...

Arch Transco Ltd. (“Arch Transco”) succeeded in its appeal of the decision dismissing its application seeking to quash an Order made by the fire inspector of the City of Regina (the “City”). The Court of Appeal held that the City’s failure to outline the process of appealing the Order at the time of issuance was fatal and rejected the City’s proposal to issue a new Order containing such appeal details as this was not a sufficient remedy.

28. January 2003 0
Administrative law – Municipalities – Fire inspection – Underground storage tanks – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Procedural requirements – Appeal process – Remedies – Certiorari Arch Transco Ltd. v. Regina (City), [2002] S.J. No. 637, Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, November 13, 2002, Tallis, Cameron and Jackson JJ.A. On January 3, 2001, a fire inspector ...

An inmate (“Smith”) at the Fort Saskatchewan Correctional Centre (“FSCC”) succeeded in his application for judicial review of a decision by the Disciplinary Board which found that he had violated regulations by consuming marijuana. The court held that the Board’s failure to allow Smith to be represented by counsel was a breach of the principles of natural justice as the charge had serious consequences, was complex and Smith did not have sufficient capacity to properly represent himself at the hearing.

28. January 2003 0
Administrative law – Prisons – Discipline of inmates – Use of narcotics – Judicial review application – Right to legal counsel – Natural justice – Remedies – Habeas corpus – Standard of review – Correctness Smith v. Fort Saskatchewan Correctional Centre, [2002] A.J. No. 1472, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, November 28, 2002, Clackson J. Smith was an ...

The majority of the Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal of a B.C. Court of Appeal decision setting aside the decision of the B.C. Supreme Court which quashed a school board resolution declining to approve three books depicting same-sex parented families as supplementary learning resources for use in kindergarten/grade one classrooms. The majority concluded that the School Board’s decision was unreasonable in the context of the educational scheme laid down by the legislature. The question whether the books should be approved as supplementary learning resources was remanded to the Board’s consideration according to the criteria laid out in the curriculum guidelines and the broad principles of tolerance and non-sectarianism underlying the School Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 412.

28. January 2003 0
Administrative law – School boards – Powers and duties – Selection of books – Statutory provisions – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness Chamberlain v. Surrey School District No. 36, [2002] S.C.J. No. 87, Supreme Court of Canada, December 20, 2002, McLachlin C.J. and L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie, Arbour and LeBel JJ. ...

Alberta Report appealed a decision of the Alberta Human Rights Panel (the “Panel”) made pursuant to s. 33 of the Human Rights, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Act, R.S.A. 1980 1980, c-H-11.7. The principal issue on appeal concerned the extent to which the Panel could take notice of evidence introduced before other tribunals and whether in this instance the Panel violated the Appellant’s right to know the case to be met. The appeal was allowed and the case remitted back to the Panel for rehearing.

28. January 2003 0
Administrative law – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Evidence – Judicial review – Natural justice – Evidence of other tribunals – Judicial notice Alberta Report v. Alberta (Human Rights and Citizenship Commission), [2002] A.J. No. 1539, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, December 10, 2002, Clark J. In the October 13, 1997 edition of its magazine, ...

A medical doctor appealed from the decision of an Inquiry Committee finding him guilty of infamous conduct and suspending him from the practice of medicine. The court refused to interfere with the Committee’s finding on credibility and the appeal was not allowed. In reviewing the Committee’s decision on penalty, the court took a deferential approach and did not overturn the ruling of the highly specialized tribunal.

28. January 2003 0
Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Inquiry committee decisions – Fairness – Evidence – Sentencing – Judicial review – Appeal process – Scope of appeal M.M. v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia, [2002] B.C.J. No. 2833, British Columbia Supreme Court, November 4, 2002, Bauman J. M.M., a medical doctor, ...

A customer of Airgas Canada Inc. complained that an employee of Airgas, Mr. Fuggle, had placed graffiti at their premises. As a result of the complaint Mr. Fuggle was dismissed by Airgas. Mr. Fuggle submitted a claim to the Director of Employment Standards requesting a determination that he had been dismissed without cause. The Director of Employment Standards concluded that Airgas had just cause to terminate Mr. Fuggle’s employment. Mr. Fuggle’s appeal to the Employment Standards Tribunal was dismissed. Prior to receiving this decision Mr. Fuggle commenced an action in the Supreme Court alleging that he was wrongfully dismissed. Airgas applied pursuant to rule 18A of the Rules of Court for an Order that the claim be dismissed on the basis that there had already been a final determination of the issues between the parties under the Employment Standards Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 113 (“Standards Act”). In dismissing the application the Court exercised its discretion to refuse to apply estoppel.

28. January 2003 0
Administrative law – Employment standards – Termination of employment – Just cause – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Issue estoppel – Discretion of court Fuggle v. Airgas Canada Inc., [2002] B.C.J. No. 2800, British Columbia Supreme Court, December 11, 2002, Burnyeat J. Airgas Canada Inc. applied to the court pursuant to Rule 18A for an order ...

Detective Robertson, an Edmonton police officer, was the subject of several citations related to his activities while on the police force. During proceedings, Detective Robertson applied to the court for a stay on the grounds that natural justice required that he be provided with funded counsel due to the complexity of the citations. The application to the court failed.

24. December 2002 0
Administrative law – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Stay of proceedings – Right to legal representation – Judicial review – Breach of procedural fairness Robertson v. Edmonton (City) Police Service, [2002] A.J. No. 1366, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, November 6, 2002, Clackson J. Fifteen citations were launched against Detective Robertson (the “Applicant”) by the Edmonton ...

A teacher applied for judicial review of a hearing committee’s decision of professional misconduct. The Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench dismissed the case; however, the Alberta Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and set aside the findings of professional misconduct concluding that the decision of the hearing committee was unreasonable and improper.

24. December 2002 0
Administrative law – Teachers – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Schools – Parental rights Eggertson v. Alberta Teachers’ Assn., [2002] A.J. No. 1358, Alberta Court of Appeal, November 5, 2002, O’Leary, Costigan and Paperny JJ.A. The Appellant was a teacher with the Calgary ...

An appeal by a registered nurse from a decision of the Appeal Committee of the Registered Nurses Association of Nova Scotia to dismiss his appeal from a decision of the Professional Conduct Committee which found that he was guilty of professional misconduct and revoked his licence. The appeal was based on several grounds including alleged procedural and fairness violations. The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

24. December 2002 0
Administrative law – Nurses – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Investigative bodies – Fairness – Role of legal counsel – Judicial review – Breach of procedural fairness Fox v. Registered Nurses’ Assn. of Nova Scotia, [2002] N.S.J. No. 486, Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, November 13, 2002, Roscoe, Chipman and Bateman JJ.A. Mr. Fox was employed ...