Intel

The latest edition of the Stockwoods Administrative and Regulatory Law Case Review is now available, featuring summaries and commentary on recent decisions from the Court of Appeal and Divisional Court that deal with the following issues:

• The Vavilov approach to reasonableness and revisiting Charter values
• Uncertainty remains about application of Vavilov to legislated standard of patent unreasonableness
• Test for examining vires of regulations not impacted by Vavilov
• Oral cautions are not penalties
• Use of video testimony and prior transcripts under the SPPA
• Decision set aside for lack of notice

Should you have any questions about the Newsletter, please feel free to contact the co-editors (Andrea Gonsalves or Justin Safayeni), or another lawyer at Stockwoods LLP.

The latest edition of the Stockwoods Administrative and Regulatory Law Case Review is available for download here, featuring summaries and commentary on some the latest decisions from the Federal Court of Appeal, Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan and Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Divisional Court) that deal with the following issues:

• The role of guidelines in Tribunal decision-making
• Statutory appeals involving off-duty conduct of regulated professionals
• Procedural fairness in a statutory appeal
• Multiple legal errors leading to discipline decision being overturned
• No need to publicize institutional interpretation of statutory provisions

Should you have any questions about the cases or issues canvassed in the Case Review, please feel free to contact the co-editors (Andrea Gonsalves or Justin Safayeni), or another lawyer at Stockwoods LLP.

The Stockwoods Administrative and Regulatory Law Case Review is back with a new issue!  You can read it here.  This time, we offer you summaries and commentary on recent decisions from the Federal Court of Appeal, Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Divisional Court) and Ontario Superior Court of Justice, dealing with the following issues:

• Contextual factors that constrain decisions on reasonableness review
• Procedural fairness requires more disclosure than rules provide
• Deference on appellate review
• New paradigm for reviewing decisions of voluntary associations
• Hospital’s COVID-19 policy not subject to judicial review

Should you have any questions about the Newsletter, please feel free to contact the co-editors (Andrea Gonsalves or Justin Safayeni), or another lawyer at Stockwoods LLP.

After taking some time off to absorb and reflect on the Supreme Court of Canada’s much-anticipated decision in Vavilov v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), released in December 2019, which reshaped substantive review of administrative decisions, the Stockwoods Administrative & Regulatory Law Case Review is back! In this issue, we explore the Vavilov decision and provide our take on some of its more interesting aspects. We also look at some of the early cases in which lower courts have considered and applied Vavilov and what they might foretell about further developments in this area, including:

• No remedy granted despite unreasonable reasons
• Disguised reasonableness review
• Court’s discretion not to hear issues raised for first time on appeal
• Application of Vavilov to appeals of arbitration decisions

“Download a copy here”.

The December 2019 issue of the Stockwoods Administrative and Regulatory Law Case Review is now available. In this issue, we discuss recent decisions from the Federal Court of Appeal, the Divisional Court, and the Discipline Committee of the College of Pharmacists in the following issues:

• Records production applications in sexual misconduct proceedings under the RHPA
• Assessing requests for redactions in administrative decisions and bolstering mandamus relief
• Expert evidence concerning impacts of trauma in witness credibility assessments
• Ministerial directives on student fees are justiciable and must be consistent with legislation
• New guidance on the test to consolidate judicial review applications with actions in a single proceeding

Download a copy here.

Should you have any questions about the Newsletter, please feel free to contact the co-editors (Pam Hrick and Zachary Al-Khatib), or any other lawyer at Stockwoods LLP.