standard of review | Page 2
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
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
Won’t Someone Please Think of the Civil Servants: John Doe v. Ontario (Finance), 2014 SCC 36
By now, it is a familiar story. The standard of review is reasonableness. An exhaustive review of the relevant statutory language and factual matrices follows. And then there is a brief conclusion: the decision is reasonable or unreasonable.At the risk of beating a horse whose death certificate is now turning yellow and fraying at the […] Read more
Who Decides Here? Deference on Ministerial Interpretations of Law (Again)
I was rather optimistic in thinking that the question of deference to ministerial interpretations of law had been settled by the Supreme Court of Canada in Agraira (see my post here). Two stern responses arrived last week from the Federal Court of Appeal, the body which deals more than any other with judicial review of […] Read more
Opening Closed Doors: Fédération autonome de l’enseignement c. Commission scolaire de Laval, 2014 QCCA 591
A background check on a teacher reveals criminal history. He is fired by the elected members of the local school board after a meeting held behind closed doors. He contests the decision and seeks to question three of the commissioners before an arbitrator. They refuse, citing privilege. Unsuccessfully, as it turns out: Fédération autonome de […] Read more
Move Along, Nothing to See Here: Orthodoxy and Procedural Fairness
A vigorous debate erupted in the comments to a recent post on deference on questions of procedural fairness. Recently, doctrinal orthodoxy has been challenged by several Canadian judges (a challenge based on Canadian developments but which ought also to be on the radar of those overseas) who have contended that procedural questions can no longer […] Read more
Standard of Review: Plus Ça Change?
In my recently published article, “The Unfortunate Triumph of Form over Substance in Canadian Administrative Law“, I argued that Dunsmuir did not make administrative law any simpler. It is always gratifying to be proved right, so it is with (gloating!) pleasure that I note the decision in Manitoba v. Russell Inns Ltd. et al., 2013 […] Read more
Appealing to the Right Place
The Québec Court of Appeal issued an important decision recently, clarifying the appropriate avenues for appeals of (some) administrative decisions: Lebel c. Kanafani, 2013 QCCA 200.At issue here was a complaint against a real estate agent, which was rejected at first instance by the appropriate regulatory body. The applicant then sought leave to appeal to […] Read more