* This is a second extract from a forthcoming essay of mine on the policy/operational distinction in Canadian tort law, “The Policy/Operational Distinction — A View from Administrative Law“. Download a draft here. See my first extract, a post on the Imperial Tobacco case, here * An administrative lawyer is comfortable in recommending that the […] Read more

In Canada, judicial review of administrative decision-makers for reasonableness has two aspects: the reasons must be understandable and the decision must fall within a range of reasonable outcomes. This gives rise to a problem. What should a court do where a decision is reasonable, but the reasons contain important inaccuracies or are incoherent? I addressed […] Read more

Matthew Groves passes on a very interesting decision from the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia: WZARH v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2014] FCAFC 137. The issue was simple. A refugee claimant went for an interview with an Independent Merits Reviewer whose task was to reassess a refusal to classify him […] Read more

I teed up Febles v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2014 SCC 68 a couple of days ago. The decision was released this morning. Here are the extracts in which the Court addressed the standard of review of questions of international law:                 I am sorry to have got […] Read more

I have a long-standing interest in the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Doré v. Barreau du Québec, [2012] 1 SCR 395, 2012 SCC 12, in which the Court endorsed a deferential approach to administrative decisions infringing fundamental rights. See this paper, for example. One of the most intriguing issues post-Doré is what the Court […] Read more

On Thursday, the Supreme Court of Canada will release its decision on the appeal in Hernandez Febles v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2012 FCA 324. I summarized the Federal Court of Appeal decision here. Here is a primer on one of the issues: whether courts should defer to administrative decision-makers on interpretations of international law. […] Read more

* This is an extract from a forthcoming article, “The Policy/Operational Distinction — A View from Administrative Law“. Download a draft here. * The uninitiated might look at the Supreme Court’s recent decision in R. v. Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd., 2011 SCC 42, [2011] 3 S.C.R. 45 and suggest that the policy/operational distinction is no longer […] Read more

An interesting question, answered in Edmonton (Police Service) v Alberta (Law Enforcement Review Board), 2014 ABCA 267. A complaint was made against a police officer but dismissed by the Chief of the Edmonton Police Service after an internal review. The complainant appealed to the Board. A report of the internal review was made available for […] Read more

Regular readers will know that I have no fondness for the idea that the “common objective” of courts and administrative decision-makers is the proper application of the principles of statutory interpretation. In part, my position is that it is unrealistic to expect administrative decision-makers to apply these principles. Some empirical doubt is cast on that […] Read more

Canadian courts are to take five factors into account in determining the content of procedural fairness in any given case. One of these factors is whether the applicant had any legitimate expectation about the procedure to be followed. I have always found this unusual. Surely once an applicant establishes that a legitimate expectation has been […] Read more