Having trouble reading this email? You can view it in your web browser
|
You're receiving this newsletter because you signed up at harpergrey.com. 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. |
||
College of Midwives
Investigations; Midwives - Professional governance - Reporting requirements; Judicial review - Parties - Disclosure of third party records - Compliance with legislation The applicant, a registrant midwife of the Respondent College of Midwives of Ontario, requested an order requiring the College to disclose the complete record of proceedings relating to a decision of the College's Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee in respect of her associate and fellow College registrant. |
|||
Health Professions Appeal and Review Board
Complaint - Multiple registrants; Physicians and surgeons - Disciplinary proceedings - Statutory provisions - Compliance with legislation - Public interest; Judicial review - Jurisdiction - Standard of review - Reasonableness simpliciter The Ontario Health Professions Appeal and Review Board acted unreasonably in its decision to review a decision in respect of multiple physician registrants listed, even though the complainant had withdrawn her review request against all but one of the registrants. |
|||
Human Rights Commission
Jurisciction of commission - Referral to Board of Inquiry - Discretion of delegated authority - Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Discrimination - Minority rights; Schools - Funding; Judicial review - Jurisdiction - Reasonableness Supreme Court of Canada upheld the Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission’s decision to refer a complaint about differential funding of French-language schools in Halifax to a board of inquiry. The decision was a discretionary determination by an administrative tribunal exercising a screening function warranting deference. |
|||
University Committees
Universities - Student discipline - Investigations; Judicial review - Procedural requirements and fairness - Failure to provide reasons The decision of the Senate to suspend a university student for misconduct was set aside for lack of procedural fairness and an order was made to implement the Senate Committee’s recommendation allowing the student's appeal. |
|||
|
Thank you for reading the April 2012 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, |
||
|