|
Having trouble reading this email? You can view it in your web browser |
 |
|||
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|||
|
About this newsletterThe Harper Grey LLP Administrative Law Observer provides a monthly review of new cases and emerging issues in Canadian professional regulation, liability and administrative law. These summaries are not legal opinions. Readers should not act on the basis of these summaries without first consulting a lawyer for analysis and advice on a specific matter. |
||
Decisions of Administrative Tribunals
Human Rights Tribunal; Human rights complaints - Discrimination - Duty to accommodate Canadian National Railway Co. v. Seeley, 2014 FCA 111, [2014] F.C.J. No. 452 The plaintiff, a mother of two children, was awarded damages for lost wages and pain and suffering, as well as $20,000 in special compensation by the Human Rights Tribunal after the CNR "recklessly" refused to give her any useful information about how long she would be staying or about housing arrangements following its temporary transfer of her to another community to cover a conductor shortage. She made out a prima facie case of discrimination on the basis of family status since she demonstrated that (i) she was responsible for the care of two children, (ii) a temporary move would disrupt her children's care, and (iii) CNR did not give her any information about how long she would be staying in Vancouver or about housing arrangements, despite her requests. CNR failed to accommodate her and her need to arrange for childcare to the point of undue hardship by refusing to provide her with the information required to make the arrangements. |
|||
College of Physicians and Surgeons
Decisions of Administrative Tribunals - Code of Conduct - Defamation; Judicial Review - Disclosure - Qualified Privilege Wang v. British Columbia Medical Assn., 2014 BCCA 162, [2014] B.C.J. No. 833 The plaintiff, a Board member of the BCMA, distributed private information from Board meetings to non-Board members. At a subsequent Board meeting, allegations were made against the plaintiff regarding her alleged breach of confidentiality provisions in the Code of Conduct and the matter was passed onto a Code of Conduct committee for investigation. The president of the BCMA then sent a letter out to all members notifying them of the investigation into the alleged breach of the Code. The plaintiff sued the BCMA for defamation on the basis of this letter and other communications. The trial judge and Court of Appeal agreed that the letter was defamatory, but that it was made on an occasion of qualified privilege. The Board had a duty to inform the membership of such an issue. |
|||
Hospital Appeal Board
Decisions of Administrative Tribunals - Hearings - Hearing De Novo; Physicians and Surgeons - Hospital Privileges - Disruptive Behaviour; Judicial Review - Standard of Review - Reasonableness Simpliciter - Evidence Toronto East General Hospital v. Gopinath, 2014 ONSC 2731, [2014], O.J. No. 2248 A gastroenterologist (“Dr. Gopinath”) secured a ruling from the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board (“Appeal Board”) renewing his privileges without condition. The Toronto East General Hospital (the “Hospital”) was unsuccessful on an appeal where it attempted to restore the earlier decision of the Hospital Board denying him privileges unless he signed an undertaking and agreement to participate in the Physician Health Program ("PHP"). |
|||
Law Societies
Decisions of Administrative Tribunals - Investigations; Paralegals - Unauthorized Practice - Advertising - Disciplinary Proceedings - Self-Representation - Penalties and Suspensions; Judicial Review - Compliance with Legislation Law Society of Upper Canada v Chiarelli, 2014 ONCA 391, [2014] O.J. No. 2328 Mr. Chiarelli (“Chiarelli”) was unsuccessful in appealing from an order that permanently enjoined him from engaging in the practice of law or in the provision of legal services in Ontario. |
|||
|
Thank you for reading the July 2014 Administrative Law ObserverPlease let me know if you have any questions about any of the cases discussed in the net letter. I would be happy to provide you with additional information. Sincerely, William Clark |
||
|