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 Nurses
Investigations; Nurses - Disciplinary proceedings - Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming; Judicial review - Quasi-judicial tribunals - Disclosure - Evidence - Witnesses - Procedural requirements and fairness - Jurisdiction The Inquiries Complaints and Reports Committee of the College of Nurses of Ontario (the “ICRC”) owed a disclosure obligation to the applicant member of the College, the College agreed that the decision of the ICRC should be quashed and the matter remitted to a differently constituted panel of the ICRC, with directions that the applicant be allowed to make submissions in respect of seven witness statements. |
|||
Labour and employment boards
Arbitration Board; Labour law - Collective agreements - Arbitration - Benefits; Judicial review - Natural justice - Procedural requirements and fairness - Failure to provide reasons - Standard of review - Reasonableness simpliciter - Correctness A union appealed a decision overturning a Chambers judge’s decision to set aside an arbitrator’s decision due to insufficient reasons was dismissed. The Court found that the arbitrator’s decision was reasonable, and the reasons allowed a reviewing Court to understand why the tribunal had made its decision. The reasons also permitted it to determine whether the conclusion was within the range of acceptable outcomes. |
|||
Ministerial; Judicial review application
Delay - Test A physician’s application for judicial review of the decision of the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care “and/or” the general manager of Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) denying him payment for medical services billed in 2002, 2003, and 2004 was set aside on the basis of delay. The original denial occurred in 2004. The last letter denying his request for reconsideration was dated February 2008. The judicial review application was served February 2011 and perfected April 2011. While the physician had distractions, there was no satisfactory explanation provided for the excessive delay in bringing the judicial review application and there was evidence of actual prejudice to the respondent. |
|||
Privacy commissioner
Adjudications; Freedom of information and protection of privacy - Disclosure - Completion of inquiry - Limitations - Extension of time; Judicial review - Compliance with legislation - Jurisdiction - Standard of review - Reasonableness An appeal by the Alberta Information and Privacy Commissioner of the decision to quash an adjudicator’s ruling that the Commissioner had lost jurisdiction due to the failure to extend the period for the completion of an inquiry was allowed. The Court found that the implied decision of the Commissioner to extend time - which was adopted by the delegated adjudicator - was reasonable. |
|||
|
Welcome to the January 2012 Administrative NewsletterPlease 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, |
||
|