“A question of general law which will require the application of a correctness standard, aside from the constitutional questions and others mentioned in Dunsmuir, are becoming increasingly few and far between, if any still exist” — Loewen v. Manitoba Teachers’ Society, 2015 MBCA 13, at para. 54. And yet, and yet, and yet…in Wilson v. […] Read more

Canada’s Human Rights Tribunals have extensive powers to investigate and redress alleged breaches of fundamental rights by public and private parties. These statutory rights overlap but do not mirror the rights protected constitutionally; the human rights codes they are found in are usually described as “quasi-constitutional”. But Canadian courts have typically been cautious in allowing […] Read more

Trinity Western University v. Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society, 2015 NSSC 25 is the first in what is likely to be a long line of cases on TWU’s battle to get a law school up, running and accredited nationwide (see my earlier post here). Campbell J. found for TWU: the Society’s decision to refuse accreditation was […] Read more

I am happy to admit that, although I believe it is time for Canadian courts to follow the suit of several appellate judges and adopt a deferential approach to questions of procedural fairness, the question is not yet settled. Recently, though without mentioning the contrary jurisprudence in his own court, Nadon J.A. assumed a correctness […] Read more

I can’t resist passing on the postscript to Norman Siebrasse’s excellent post on standard of review issues raised in a recent (and interesting) patent case at the Federal Court: Finally, on a personal note, Dunsmuir was the clerk of the court in Fredericton, New Brunswick (the full name of the case is Dunsmuir v New […] Read more

Here is an interesting Supreme Court of the United States opinion on a statutory requirement to give reasons: T-Mobile South, LLC v. City of Roswell, 574 U.S. ___ (2015). T-Mobile wanted to build a cell-phone tower in Roswell. The City refused to give permission: the elected members of the Council adopted a motion to deny […] Read more

Tervita Corp. v. Canada (Commissioner of Competition), 2015 SCC 3 is a long, complex and important decision on competition law. It also contains a spirited disagreement between Rothstein and Abella JJ. on the appropriate standard of review of determinations of law made by the Competition Tribunal. Oddly enough, I think both of them are right: […] Read more

The Federal Court of Appeal decision in Hupacasath First Nation v. Canada (Attorney General), 2015 FCA 4 on justiciability of international treaties, the prerogative in respect of foreign affairs, the duty to consult First Nations and the jurisdiction of the federal courts is hugely significant (first-instance decision noted here). At issue was a foreign investment promotion […] Read more

The English courts have in recent decades recognized a common law duty to consult as an aspect of the duty of fairness. It was the subject of a comprehensive treatment by the Supreme Court in R. (Moseley) v. London Borough of Haringey, [2014] UKSC 56, though it is not clear whether Lord Wilson’s more expansive […] Read more

As is well-known, the Supreme Court of Canada stated in Doré v. Barreau du Québec, [2012] 1 SCR 395 that administrative decision-makers must consider Charter values in the exercise of discretionary powers. However, this duty has recently been cast in very limited terms by a strong bench of Ontario’s Divisional Court in Iacovelli v. College […] Read more