Even though guidelines (and other species of ‘soft’ law) are not binding, they can influence the meaning given to legislation. A series of four Supreme Court of Canada decisions make the point: in interpreting a statutory provision, it is necessary to have regard to text, purpose and context; relevant guidelines are part of the interpretive […] Read more

In most Canadian jurisdictions, an unsuccessful party can appeal a judicial review decision as of right. In a previous post (see here), I discussed whether the appellant bears, or should bear, a ‘tactical burden’ to convince the appellate court that the first-instance judge got something wrong. However, in two Canadian jurisdictions, the ability to seek […] Read more

Some of you may know that along with Sujit Choudhry I am representing Democracy Watch in its appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada of the decision in Democracy Watch v. Canada (Attorney General), 2024 FCA 158. As is my practice, I do not intend to comment on the case between now and the Supreme […] Read more

I had the unique pleasure of being counsel to the applicant in a judicial review application that was allowed from the Bench: Ontario Association of Chicken Processors v. Ontario Broiler Hatching Egg & Chicken Commission, 2025 ONSC 4174. This was an application in respect of a decision made after a de novo hearing before Ontario’s Agriculture, Food […] Read more

A question that has garnered relatively little attention in recent years is whether the bias of one member of an adjudicative body taints the entirety of the decision. The Supreme Court of Canada’s authorities point in two directions. On the one hand, in Newfoundland Telephone Co. v. Newfoundland (Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities), [1992] […] Read more

Government policy and the adjudicative independence of regulatory tribunals has long been a source of contention in Canada. A recent judicial contribution offers interesting reflections on the relationship between economic regulators and government policy: Procureur général du Québec c. Duquette, 2025 QCCA 616. In particular, there are thought-provoking comments about the nature of rate-setting and […] Read more

The use of artificial intelligence in public administration has recently been a source of significant debate. One issue that arises, in the context of judicial review specifically, is whether and to what extent an individual is entitled to know about the use of artificial intelligence in administrative decision-making. The answer given in Mehrara v. Canada […] Read more

Subsection 63(2) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27, provides: “A foreign national who holds a permanent resident visa may appeal to the Immigration Appeal Division against a decision to make a removal order against them made under subsection 44(2) or made at an admissibility hearing”. The appellant in Pepa v. Canada […] Read more

This is an excerpt from my paper, “The Scope and Meaning of Reasonableness Review after Vavilov“ As is well known, the Supreme Court’s guidance on reasonableness review prior to Vavilov was extremely limited, a shortcoming that was emphatically addressed in the majority reasons. The General Structure of Reasonableness Review There are three general points to […] Read more

On Thursday, the University of Alberta will host a conference marking the fifth anniversary of the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65. Gerard Kennedy (Alberta) and Mark Mancini (TRU) were the brains of this operation; I carpet-bagged my way onto the organizing committee once […] Read more