Comments | Page 88
Comments
Administrative Law Values VII: Institutional Considerations
I have a new essay on SSRN, “Administrative Law: A Values-Based Approach“, prepared for the inaugural Public Law Conference at the University of Cambridge later this year. This is the latest in a series of mini-posts. Download the whole essay here. Institutional Considerations Various institutional considerations may be invoked from time to time to supplement […] Read more
Comments
Deference Within Agencies?
Once more unto the ‘internal standard of review’ breach. Do the principles regulating judicial review by courts of administrative decision-makers apply when there is an appeal within an agency, and if so, to what extent? I tackled this question last year in the context of the Refugee Appeal Division. Now, the Federal Court has pronounced […] Read more
Comments
Deference Across the Public-Private Divide
Public lawyers may sometimes tend to think that deference is a phenomenon unique to cases involving judicial review of government action. A moment’s reflection should be enough to dispel that notion. For example, judges in civil trials regularly defer to expert witnesses (negligence being a particular case in point) and boards of directors; and appellate […] Read more
Comments
New Article on Reasonableness Review in Canada
Readers may be interested in “The Scope and Meaning of Reasonableness Review“, a new article of mine on judicial review of administrative action which will appear shortly in the Alberta Law Review. (Apologies to RSS and email subscribers who have already received the notification: I hope to fix the ‘double post’ issue shortly.) It is […] Read more
Comments
Administrative Law Values VI: Remedial Discretion
I have a new essay on SSRN, “Administrative Law: A Values-Based Approach“, prepared for the inaugural Public Law Conference at the University of Cambridge later this year. This is the latest in a series of mini-posts. Download the whole essay here. Remedial Discretion Remedies have posed a problem for administrative law since waves of doctrinal […] Read more
Comments
Regulating the Right to be Forgotten?
The European Court of Justice’s recent ‘Right to be Forgotten‘ ruling has caused much ink to be spilled. Despite the significant criticism it has received, I think the decision was quite sensible, for reasons given here by Eric Posner. It continues to provoke interesting commentary. Consider the following description of the problem from Babak Siavoshy […] Read more
Comments
Cost-Benefit Analysis and Human Dignity
Two recent papers deal with some hard questions in the area of cost-benefit analysis. Here are two recurring problems: (a) deciding which costs and benefits to count and (b) how precisely to count some types of costs and benefits. For example, can ‘collateral’ effects of government action be excluded from consideration? Is it appropriate to […] Read more
Comments
Bad Timing? Policies, Individualized Decision-Making and Time Limits
Here are two contrasting Court of Appeal decisions relating to human rights decision-makers’ ability to hear late-filed complaints: British Columbia (Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General) v. Mzite, 2014 BCCA 220 and Izaak Walton Killam Health Centre v. Nova Scotia (Human Rights Commission), 2014 NSCA 18. In the latter, the decision-maker proceeded pursuant to […] Read more
Comments
Administrative Law Values V: Substantive Review
I have a new essay on SSRN, “Administrative Law: A Values-Based Approach“, prepared for the inaugural Public Law Conference at the University of Cambridge later this year. This is the latest in a series of mini-posts. Download the whole essay here. Substantive Review In many jurisdictions it is now accepted that where an administrative decision-maker […] Read more
Comments
Standards of Review: The ABCA Weighs In
A well-written student note takes me to task for my interpretation of Catalyst Paper Corp. v. North Cowichan (District), [2012] 1 SCR 5. Catalyst has not (yet) proved to be catalytic. It has not been applied to delegated legislation or decisions taken by other elected bodies. I unhesitatingly concede that Canadian courts have treated Catalyst […] Read more