There are several points of general interest raised by the Supreme Court of Canada’s most recent administrative law decision, Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd., 2016 SCC 29. By majority, the Court reversed the Federal Court of Appeal (see my post). For a discussion of the merits — in which the Court restored what labour […] Read more

Apologies for the title. Mentioning issue estoppel would have caused my page views to crash through the floor, which would have been a pity because there is a recent case that raises an interesting technical point about issue estoppel and standard of review. In British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Board) v. Figliola, 2011 SCC 52 the […] Read more

David Mullan’s comment on yesterday’s post prompts me to give (virtual) voice to a thought about the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Mouvement laïque québécois v. Saguenay (City), 2015 SCC 16. Gascon J. reviewed the question of the scope of the state’s duty of religious neutrality on a standard of correctness — allowing him […] Read more

My administrative law students will sit their final exam on Friday. So some of them having been coming to see me with questions about the finer points of Canadian administrative law doctrine. Often, my answer is: “Je ne sais pas”. And, unfortunately, the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Mouvement laïque québécois v. Saguenay (City), […] Read more

“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

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

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

Canadian decisions on internal appellate review are coming thick and fast. Another one arrived last week, with some media fanfare: Huruglica v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2014 FC 799. Here, Phelan J. gave the Refugee Appeal Division a very broad role indeed. Rebuking the Division for applying judicial review standards to an internal appeal, he […] Read more

Questions continue to abound about the standard of review of administrative action in Canada. For something apparently simplified in Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick and subsequent cases, it provokes a great many questions. The key question now, in light of the “triumph” of reasonableness, is the scope and meaning of reasonableness review. To what does the […] Read more

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