SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Hyson v. Nova Scotia (Public Service LTD), 2016 NSSC 153

Save this PDF as:
 WORD  PNG  TXT  JPG

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Hyson v. Nova Scotia (Public Service LTD), 2016 NSSC 153"

Transcription

1 SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Hyson v. Nova Scotia (Public Service LTD), 2016 NSSC 153 Date: Docket: Hfx No Registry: Halifax Between: Annette Louise Hyson Applicant v. Nova Scotia Public Service Long Term Disability Plan Trust Fund and Dr. Colin F Davey Respondents LIBRARY HEADING Judge: Heard: Subject: Summary: The Honourable Justice James L. Chipman April 28, 2016 in Halifax, Nova Scotia Judicial review Appeal Board s consideration of extrinsic evidence in denying LTD benefits The Applicant is an employee of the Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, insured for long term disability under the Nova Scotia Public Services Long Term Disability Plan. She applied for LTD benefits and was denied. The Applicant made further submissions and the denial was maintained. She appealed and the matter was referred to an Appeal Board. The Appeal Board conducted its own research and denied the appeal.

2 Issues: (1) Was the Applicant owed procedural fairness? (2) Did the Appeal Board s reliance on outside sources result in a breach of the duty of fairness? Result: As an administrative decision-maker, the Appeal Board owed Ms. Hyson procedural fairness, which is a sufficient basis for judicial review. The Appeal Board s use of independent research, without giving the Applicant an opportunity to respond, violated the duty of fairness. Procedural fairness is a fundamental tenet of judicial review and should not in any circumstances be ignored. In this case, it is apparent that the outside research significantly influenced the result. Accordingly, the decision of the Appeal Board was set aside and Ms. Hyson s appeal was referred to a newly constituted Appeal Board. THIS INFORMATION SHEET DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE COURT'S DECISION. QUOTES MUST BE FROM THE DECISION, NOT THIS LIBRARY SHEET.

3 SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Hyson v. Nova Scotia (Public Service LTD), 2016 NSSC 153 Date: Docket: Hfx No Registry: Halifax Between: Annette Louise Hyson Applicant v. Nova Scotia Public Service Long Term Disability Plan Trust Fund and Dr. Colin F. Davey Respondents Judge: Heard: The Honourable Justice James L. Chipman April 28, 2016, in Halifax, Nova Scotia Counsel: Nicolle A. Snow, for the Applicant Colin D. Bryson, Q.C. and Kristin Pike, for Nova Scotia Public Service Long Term Disability Plan Trust Fund Dr. Colin F. Davey, not appearing

4 Page 2 By the Court: Introduction [1] The Applicant is an employee of the Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources. Ms. Hyson is insured for long term disability under the Nova Scotia Public Services Long Term Disability Plan. She applied for LTD benefits and was denied. The Applicant made further submissions and the denial was maintained. She appealed and the matter was referred to an Appeal Board. The Appeal Board denied the appeal. [2] By amended Notice for Judicial Review, the Applicant requests judicial review of the decision of the Appeal Board. She seeks review on these grounds: a) the decision maker applied the wrong test and considered the wrong factors when determining whether the applicant was disabled within the meaning of the Plan; b) the decision maker referenced documents and information that were not admitted into evidence and were not properly before the Medical Appeal Board in the decision making process; c) the decision maker made findings of fact based on information and documents that were not admitted into evidence and were not properly before the Appeal Board, and applied those findings of fact in his determination; d) the decision maker gave evidence in the course of the decision making process; and e) the decision maker ignored or disregarded important medical opinions and evidence that were properly before the Appeal Board, causing the Appeal Board to come to a wrong determination. [3] The decision maker referred to above is the Respondent, Dr. Colin F. Davey. Dr. Davey sat as a sole member of the Appeal Board and his decision was provided to the Applicant s lawyer on December 16, 2015.

5 [4] By amended Notice of Participation, the Respondent, Nova Scotia Public Service Long Term Disability Plan Trust Fund, says the Application should be dismissed on grounds that the Appeal Board: a) applied the correct test; b) did not consider incorrect factors; c) did not inappropriately reference evidence not before the Appeal Board; d) did not make findings of fact on evidence not properly before the Appeal Board; and e) did not give evidence. [5] The parties filed briefs and books of authorities and presented oral arguments. Books of records comprising nearly 1700 pages formed the Record before the Court. The Appeal Board Decision Page 3 [6] The Trustees to the LTD Plan and Dr. Davey entered into an agreement for Dr. Davey to act as the Appeal Board. The second recital of the agreement says the Appeal System is contained in s. 6 of the LTD Plan, which includes: a) The appeal will be limited to determining whether or not the employee is disabled, as defined herein. [7] Subpara. 1(ca) of the LTD plan provides as follows: disability / disabled means, for employees whose elimination period commences on or after May 1, 2002 and who make a claim under the Plan, the complete inability, as defined from time to time in Guidelines made pursuant to this Plan, of an employee, because of illness or injury, to perform the regular duties of his/her occupation during the applicable elimination period and the next 24 months of any period of disability. Thereafter, an employee remains disabled if he/she is unable to engage in any occupation for remuneration or profit for which the employee is or may become fit through education, training, experience or rehabilitation, which occupation pays not less than 75% of the current rate of the position, class and step he/she held prior to disability. [8] The parties agree, as I find, that the Appeal Board was tasked with determining on a balance of probabilities, whether Ms. Hyson s diagnoses disabled her from her own occupation.

6 Page 4 [9] At page one of Dr. Davey s 28 page decision, he states: The issue before the Medical Appeal Board is whether or not Annette Hyson meets the criteria for disability benefits under the own occupation definition of disability. [10] On the last page, he concludes: In conclusion the Medical Appeal Board having considered all of the above information finds Ms. Annette Hyson diagnoses do not meet the criteria for functional capacity impairment limitation based on the objective evidence. The functional capacity restriction is based on reported side effects or symptoms. There is insufficient information to recommend restricting activities beyond a sedentary to light level of work demand. The Plan definition states the complete inability to meet job requirements warrants total disability. Ms. Hyson does not meet the criteria for total disability. Ms. Hyson s Appeal for Long Term Disability benefits under the own occupation clause is denied. [11] The Applicant is now into the any occupation period as the change of definition date occurred on January 1, Jurisdiction [12] The LTD Plan (s. 6(1) and (2)) states that an Appeal Board decision is final. This is reiterated in the LTD Plan s Appeal Guidelines under no. 17: The Appeal Board s decision is final and binding and not open to judicial review. [13] Notwithstanding the wording of the LTD Plan, the parties agree, and I find, that the Court has jurisdiction to review the Appeal Board decision. The jurisdiction comes from the Supreme Court of Canada s leading decision in Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick, [2008] 1 S.C.R. 190 (see paras ). In the wake of this decision, courts have consistently held that a privative clause (such as s. 6(1) and (2)) cannot remove the judiciary s power to review actions and decisions of administrative bodies for legality, fairness and reasonableness.

7 Page 5 Grounds of Review in Context [14] When I consider the five grounds of review in the context of the record and counsels argument, it is clear that the main ground relates to the allegation that the Appeal Board considered evidence that was not properly before it. For reasons that will become apparent, I have decided to firstly deal with this ground or issue. Standard of Review Applicable to the Issue of the Appeal Board Considering Extrinsic Evidence [15] As our Court of Appeal stated in Jono Developments Ltd. v. North End Community Health Association, 2014 NSCA 92, at para. 41, no standard of review analysis governs judicial review, where the complaint is based upon a denial of natural justice or procedural fairness. [16] In Labourers International Union of North America, Local 615 v. CanMar Contracting Ltd., 2016 NSCA 40, Justice Fichaud had cause to review the above passage from Jono Developments Ltd. At para. 46, Justice Fichaud noted that the Jono decision relied on the earlier Nova Scotia Court of Appeal decision of Nova Scotia (Community Services) v. T.G., 2012 NSCA 43 at para. 90: [90] A court that considers whether a decision maker violated its duty of procedural fairness does not apply a standard of review to the tribunal. The judge is not reviewing the substance of the tribunal s decision. Rather the judge, at first instance, assesses the tribunal s process, a topic that lies outside standard of review analysis: Moreau-Bérubé v. New Brunswick (Judicial Council), [2002] 1 S.C.R. 249, at para. 74, per Arbour J.; C.U.P.E. v. Ontario (Minister of Labour), [2003] 1 S.C.R. 539, at paras , per Binnie J.; Creager v. Nova Scotia (Provincial Dental Board), 2005 NSCA 9, paras ; Kelly v. Nova Scotia Police Commission, 2006 NSCA 27 [Burt v. Kelly], para. 19; Nova Scotia (Community Services) v. N.N.M., 2008 NSCA 69, para. 39; Allstate Insurance Company v. Nova Scotia (Insurance Review Board), 2009 NSCA 75, para. 11; Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada, Local 141 v. Bowater Mersey Paper Co. Ltd., 2010 NSCA 19, paras [Justice Fichaud s bolding included.] [17] Fichaud, J.A. continued in Labourers International Union of North America, Local 615 at para. 47: [47] The reason there is no standard of review for a matter of procedural fairness is that no tribunal decision is under review. The court is examining how

8 the tribunal acted, not the end product. If, on the other hand, the applicant asks the court to overturn a tribunal s decision including one that discusses procedure a standard of review analysis is needed. The reviewing court must decide whether to apply correctness or reasonableness to the tribunal s decision. (e.g. Coates, supra, paras ) Page 6 [18] In the matter before the Court, Dr. Davey s decision is, of course, under review. Nevertheless, part of grounds (b) and (c) relate to how the Appeal Board acted. Once again, the Applicant alleges Dr. Davey referred to materials or admitted into evidence documents that were not properly before him. [19] In her rebuttal brief and in oral argument, the Applicant gives specific examples of Dr. Davey s reliance on outside information, referring to: a) Hill s criteria for causation; b) notifbutwhen.ca; c) drugbank.ca; d) New England Journal of Medicine; e) AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 6 th edition; and f) CDC Guidelines. [20] Referring to the above, Ms. Hyson asserts she had, absolutely no opportunity to respond to the evidence and information the decision maker referred to and relied on in coming to a decision. This is plainly wrong. [21] Ms. Hyson characterizes this as a breach of procedural fairness, referring to Cardinal v. Kent Institution, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 643, at p. 661, Edmonton Police Association v. Edmonton (City of), 2007 ABCA 184 at paras. 3 and 4, and Brant v. Nova Scotia (Human Rights Commission), 2013 NSSC 56 at para. 10. [22] The above cases address the importance of procedural fairness, albeit do so without directly dealing with the issue of a decision maker relying on outside sources. In any event, Article 2 of the agreement between Dr. Davey and the Trustees is entitled Operation of the Appeal Board and states as follows at 2.08: The Appeal Board members shall render decisions in an independent manner and shall only receive and consider submissions from the Claims Administrator, staff of the LTD office or the appellant and his/her representatives at hearings scheduled and conducted in accordance with the appeal procedures set out in the Plan, the Appeal Guidelines, this Agreement and the Guidelines made pursuant to the Plan. Both the Trustees and the appellant, directly or through their

9 Page 7 representatives, shall be given adequate notice and full opportunity to present their respective cases to the Appeal Board. [emphasis added] [23] In response to the allegation of procedural unfairness, the Respondent argues that Dr. Davey s consultation with outside sources is akin to a Judge referring to legal authorities (not referenced by the parties) in deciding a case. For example, at para. 93 of his brief, Mr. Bryson asserts: The Appeal Board consists of a doctor who, by virtue of his profession, clearly has medical expertise. It is submitted that it is expected that this Appeal board will use its expertise to evaluate the evidence and arrive at a conclusion. It is submitted that it is expected that the Appeal Board will use its general knowledge and ability to draw upon other relevant sources to make a decision that is factually and medically sound and supported by the evidence. Just as Justice of this Court would not be validly criticized for referring to a dictionary, case law or legal treatise not referenced by the parties in making a decision, the Appeal Board should not be criticized for referencing the above sources. Doing so is not a reviewable error. [24] The Respondent goes on to cite authority for the proposition that an arbitrator may update caselaw presented to him or her (see Greater Toronto Airport Authority v. Public Service Alliance Canada, Local 0004, 2011 ONSC 487, at paras ). Further, the Respondent refers to caselaw to the effect that a tribunal should be expected to use its background, experience, skill and specialized knowledge in analyzing and evaluating evidence. [25] With respect, when I review the totality of the outside sources reviewed by Dr. Davey, I find they amount to far more than the analogy to updating caselaw. Indeed, I am drawn to the Applicant s submission that Dr. Davey s independent research violated the principles of procedural fairness by foreclosing Ms. Hyson s ability to respond. [26] In Islam v. Nova Scotia (Human Rights Commission), 2012 NSSC 67, Justice McDougall noted as follows at para. 24: The Commission is free to determine its own procedures. That being said, those procedures must meet minimal demands of procedural fairness. I am not satisfied that denying a right of reply in these circumstances accords with this standard. The distinguishing point is that Dalhousie's submission ignored the issue upon which it was invited to provide its views prejudice to the University arising

10 from an extension of time for Dr. Islam to file his complaint and instead offered the university's views on exceptional circumstances and the public interest. I am satisfied that procedural fairness demanded that Dr. Islam be given an opportunity to reply to the University's position on these issues. [Emphasis added.] Page 8 [27] Several cases from the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal hold that it is a material error to resort to extrinsic authority (see Nova Scotia (Community Services) v. B.F., 2003 NSCA 119, G.L. v. Children's Aid Society of Cape Breton-Victoria, 2003 NSCA 112, Children s Aid Society and Family Services of Colchester County v. E.Z., 2007 NSCA 99 and R. v. B.M.S., 2016 NSCA 35). Nevertheless, in Gallant v. Gallant, 2009 NSCA 56, the Court of Appeal added that a tangential mention, which does not materially alter the result, is appropriate (see para. 13). [28] When I consider the circumstances of this case coupled with the Baker factors (see Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 817) and the procedural fairness jurisprudence, I arrive at the conclusion that the Applicant should have been afforded the opportunity to respond to the independent research. [29] Based on my review of the Record inclusive of Dr. Davey s decision (as will be more fully addressed below), I am of the view that his reliance on the outside sources amounts to much more than tangential mention. Accordingly, I have determined it appropriate to continue my analysis in the context of the Appeal Board decision, as set out in the following section. Standard of Review Applicable to the Appeal Board s Decision [30] Recently, in Nova Scotia Liquor Corporation v. Nova Scotia (Board of Inquiry), 2016 NSCA 28, Justice Bourgeois drew on Supreme Court of Canada authority in explaining when to apply either the standard of correctness or reasonableness to an administrative decision: [27] When to apply the two alternatives, was nicely summarized by Fish, J. in Smith v. Alliance Pipeline Ltd., 2011 SCC 7 as follows: [26] Under Dunsmuir, the identified categories are subject to review for either correctness or reasonableness. The standard of correctness governs: (1) a constitutional issue; (2) a question of general law that is both of central importance to the legal system as a whole and outside the

11 adjudicator s specialized area of expertise (Dunsmuir, at para. 60 citing Toronto (City) v. C.U.P.E., Local 79, 2003 SCC 63, [2003] 3 S.C.R. 77, at para. 62); (3) the drawing of jurisdictional lines between two or more competing specialized tribunals; and (4) a true question of jurisdiction or vires (paras ). On the other hand, reasonableness is normally the governing standard where the question: (1) relates to the interpretation of the tribunal s enabling (or home ) statute or statutes closely connected to its function, with which it will have particular familiarity (para. 54); (2) raises issues of fact, discretion or policy; or (3) involves inextricably intertwined legal and factual issues (paras. 51 and 53-54). [emphasis added] [31] On the issue of the Appeal Board consulting outside sources, the parties agree, and I find, that his decision should be reviewed pursuant to a standard of correctness. Page 9 [32] The Applicant says Dr. Davey, in determining she was not disabled, applied the wrong test and considered the wrong factors. She emphasizes that the Appeal Board misdirected itself by straying from the task at hand. Ms. Hyson says that Dr. Davey set out definitions and referenced terms which were not in keeping with the LTD Plan definition of disability (subpara. 1(ca)). [33] I have reviewed Dr. Davey s decision in the context of the extrinsic evidence. Dr. Davey begins by stating that the issue before him is whether the Applicant meets the Plan definition of disabled and then immediately proceeds to consider her diagnoses in the context of the definition of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. The AMA Guides informs his approach to the distinction between a disease and a syndrome, which leads to his use of Hill s criteria for causation. This piece of extrinsic evidence creates a framework for Dr. Davey assessing the likelihood of Ms. Hyson s Post Treatment Lyme Syndrome (PTLS) diagnosis. Rejection of this diagnosis is central to the dismissal of the appeal and the extrinsic evidence therefore plays a considerable role in Dr. Davey s decision. [34] When I review the decision, it is my finding that the use of the website drugbank.ca was similarly significant. In this regard, the Appeal Board indicated that the Applicant s symptoms could be explained as drug interactions with side-effects, effectively rebutting the diagnosis of PTLS. Accordingly, this extrinsic source was utilized to determine the properties of the drugs Ms. Hyson was taking toward a differential diagnosis. In my view, this significantly

12 Page 10 influenced the rejection of the probability of PTLS. Similarly, the use of the website notifbutwhen.ca had a significant impact on the finding that Ms. Hyson was not cognitively impaired. This factored heavily into the finding that she was not disabled within the Plan s definition. [35] In the result, it is my finding that Dr. Davey s reliance on outside information was significant and caused him to stray from the task at hand. In so doing, it is my finding that Dr. Davey s decision was incorrect. [36] Given my conclusions on grounds of appeal (b) and (c), it is not necessary for me to address the other grounds raised by the Applicant. Conclusion [37] As an administrative decision-maker, the Appeal Board owed Ms. Hyson procedural fairness, which is a sufficient basis for judicial review. Dr. Davey s use of independent research violated the duty of fairness. [38] Procedural fairness is a fundamental tenet of judicial review and should not in any circumstances be ignored. In this case, it is apparent that the outside research significantly influenced the result. Accordingly, I hereby set aside the decision of the Appeal Board. Further, I order that Annette Louise Hyson s appeal be referred to a newly constituted Appeal Board. [39] If the parties cannot agree on costs, I will receive written submissions within 30 days. Chipman, J.

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Lymburner v. Nova Scotia (Health and Wellness) 2016 NSSC 23

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Lymburner v. Nova Scotia (Health and Wellness) 2016 NSSC 23 SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Lymburner v. Nova Scotia (Health and Wellness) 2016 NSSC 23 Date: 20160118 Docket: Hfx No. 435272 Registry: Halifax Between: Dr. Dana Lymburner v. Applicant Her Majesty

More information

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Baker v. Nova Scotia (Workers Compensation Appeals Tribunal), 2017 NSCA 83

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Baker v. Nova Scotia (Workers Compensation Appeals Tribunal), 2017 NSCA 83 NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Baker v. Nova Scotia (Workers Compensation Appeals Tribunal), 2017 NSCA 83 Date: 20171128 Docket: CA 453768 Registry: Halifax Between: Jeffrey Baker v. Appellant Nova

More information

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Nova Scotia Association of Health Organizations Long Term Disability Plan Trust Fund v. Amirault, 2017 NSCA 50

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Nova Scotia Association of Health Organizations Long Term Disability Plan Trust Fund v. Amirault, 2017 NSCA 50 NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Nova Scotia Association of Health Organizations Long Term Disability Plan Trust Fund v. Amirault, 2017 NSCA 50 Date: 20170613 Docket: CA 460158 Registry: Halifax Between:

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Dalhousie University v. Cogeneration and Energy Management Engineering Inc., 2017 NSSC 303

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Dalhousie University v. Cogeneration and Energy Management Engineering Inc., 2017 NSSC 303 SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Dalhousie University v. Cogeneration and Energy Management Engineering Inc., 2017 NSSC 303 Date: 20171128 Docket: Hfx No. 458586 Registry: Halifax Between: Dalhousie

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Banfield v. RKO Steel Ltd., 2017 NSSC 232. Thomas Banfield D E C I S I O N

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Banfield v. RKO Steel Ltd., 2017 NSSC 232. Thomas Banfield D E C I S I O N SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Banfield v. RKO Steel Ltd., 2017 NSSC 232 Date: 2017-09-07 Docket: Hfx No. 415476 Registry: Halifax Between: Thomas Banfield v. Plaintiff RKO Steel Limited, a body

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Smith, 2017 NSSC 122. v. Tyrico Thomas Smith

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Smith, 2017 NSSC 122. v. Tyrico Thomas Smith SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Smith, 2017 NSSC 122 Date: 20170509 Docket: Cr. No. 449182 Registry: Halifax Between: Her Majesty the Queen v. Tyrico Thomas Smith Judge: Heard: Sentencing

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Quadrangle Holdings Ltd. v. Coady Estate, 2016 NSSC 106

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Quadrangle Holdings Ltd. v. Coady Estate, 2016 NSSC 106 SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Quadrangle Holdings Ltd. v. Coady Estate, 2016 NSSC 106 Date: 2016-04-18 Docket: Hfx No. 291455 Registry: Halifax Between: Quadrangle Holdings Ltd. v. Plaintiff v.

More information

Review of Administrative Decisions Involving Charter Rights: The Shortcomings of the SCC Decision in Doré

Review of Administrative Decisions Involving Charter Rights: The Shortcomings of the SCC Decision in Doré Review of Administrative Decisions Involving Charter Rights: The Shortcomings of the SCC Decision in Doré February 24, 2014, OTTAWA Distinct But Overlapping: Administrative Law and the Charter Over the

More information

REVIEW REPORT FI December 29, 2015 Department of Finance

REVIEW REPORT FI December 29, 2015 Department of Finance Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner for Nova Scotia Report of the Commissioner (Review Officer) Catherine Tully REVIEW REPORT FI-13-28 December 29, 2015 Department of Finance Summary: The

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Monkman v. Serious Incident Response Team, 2015 NSSC 325. Director of SIRT (Serious Incident Response Team)

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Monkman v. Serious Incident Response Team, 2015 NSSC 325. Director of SIRT (Serious Incident Response Team) SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Monkman v. Serious Incident Response Team, 2015 NSSC 325 Date: 2015-11-13 Docket: Hfx No. 430152 Registry: Halifax Between: Helen Monkman v. Appellant Director of

More information

Page: 2 In the Matter of In the Matter of the Workers Compensation Act, R.S.A. 2000, c.w-15, As Amended ( WCA ) And in the Matter of a Decision by the

Page: 2 In the Matter of In the Matter of the Workers Compensation Act, R.S.A. 2000, c.w-15, As Amended ( WCA ) And in the Matter of a Decision by the Court of Queen s Bench of Alberta Citation: Homes by Avi Ltd. v. Alberta (Workers Compensation Board, Appeals Commission), 2007 ABQB 203 Date: 20070326 Docket: 0603 14909, 0603 14405, 0603 12833 Registry:

More information

Administrative Penalties

Administrative Penalties Administrative Penalties Final Report March 2012 Administrative penalties are a mechanism for enforcing compliance with regulatory legislation. They are monetary penalties assessed and imposed by a regulator

More information

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Frank George s Island Investments Ltd. v. Shannon, 2016 NSCA 24

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Frank George s Island Investments Ltd. v. Shannon, 2016 NSCA 24 NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Frank George s Island Investments Ltd. v. Shannon, 2016 NSCA 24 Between: Date: 20160404 Docket: CA 441130 Registry: Halifax Frank George s Island Investments Limited,

More information

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Abridean International Inc. v. Bidgood, 2017 NSCA 65

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Abridean International Inc. v. Bidgood, 2017 NSCA 65 NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Abridean International Inc. v. Bidgood, 2017 NSCA 65 Date: 20170712 Docket: CA 456387 Registry: Halifax Between: Abridean International Inc. and/or Sagecrowd Inc.

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Colpitts, 2017 NSSC 22. Robert Blois Colpitts. Her Majesty the Queen MID-TRIAL RULING TRIAL MANAGEMENT

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Colpitts, 2017 NSSC 22. Robert Blois Colpitts. Her Majesty the Queen MID-TRIAL RULING TRIAL MANAGEMENT SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Colpitts, 2017 NSSC 22 Date: 20170124 Docket: CRH 346068 Registry: Halifax Between: Robert Blois Colpitts v. Her Majesty the Queen MID-TRIAL RULING TRIAL MANAGEMENT

More information

The Canadian Institute ADVANCED ADMINISTRATIVE LAW & PRACTICE May 1 and 2, 2008

The Canadian Institute ADVANCED ADMINISTRATIVE LAW & PRACTICE May 1 and 2, 2008 The Canadian Institute ADVANCED ADMINISTRATIVE LAW & PRACTICE May 1 and 2, 2008 MANAGING YOUR MULTIPLE ROLES AS TRIBUNAL COUNSEL By Gilbert Van Nes, General Counsel & Settlement Officer Alberta Environmental

More information

Nova Scotia (Workers' Compensation Board) v. Martin; Nova Scotia (Workers' Compensation Board) v. Laseur

Nova Scotia (Workers' Compensation Board) v. Martin; Nova Scotia (Workers' Compensation Board) v. Laseur Nova Scotia (Workers' Compensation Board) v. Martin; Nova Scotia (Workers' Compensation Board) v. Laseur Donald Martin Appellant v. Workers' Compensation Board of Nova Scotia and Attorney General of Nova

More information

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Nova Scotia (Attorney General) v. MacLean, 2016 NSCA 69

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Nova Scotia (Attorney General) v. MacLean, 2016 NSCA 69 Between: NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Nova Scotia (Attorney General) v. MacLean, 2016 NSCA 69 Date: 20160919 Docket: CA No. 454541 Registry: Halifax The Attorney General of Nova Scotia representing

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Fana (DCD) Holdings Inc. v. Dartmouth Cove Developments Inc., 2017 NSSC 157

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Fana (DCD) Holdings Inc. v. Dartmouth Cove Developments Inc., 2017 NSSC 157 SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Fana (DCD) Holdings Inc. v. Dartmouth Cove Developments Inc., 2017 NSSC 157 Between: Date: 2017-06-07 Docket: Hfx No. 461513 Registry: Halifax Fana (DCD) Holdings

More information

disbursements, per reasons for judgment of Fichaud,

disbursements, per reasons for judgment of Fichaud, Appellant Respondents Registry: Halifax Docket: CA 392882 Date: 20130222 IN THE NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL hereby certify that the foregoing document, identified by the Seal of the Court, is a true copy

More information

Towards an Inclusive Framework for the Right to Legal Capacity. in Nova Scotia

Towards an Inclusive Framework for the Right to Legal Capacity. in Nova Scotia Towards an Inclusive Framework for the Right to Legal Capacity in Nova Scotia A Brief Submitted in Response to: The Law Reform Commission of Nova Scotia s Discussion Paper on the Powers of Attorney Act

More information

Mobil Investments Canada Inc. and Murphy Oil Corporation, Respondents. John Terry and Emily Sherkey, for the Respondents REASONS FOR DECISION

Mobil Investments Canada Inc. and Murphy Oil Corporation, Respondents. John Terry and Emily Sherkey, for the Respondents REASONS FOR DECISION CITATION: Attorney General of Canada v. Mobil et al., 2016 ONSC 790 COURT FILE NO.: CV-15-11079-00CL DATE: 20160216 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE ONTARIO COMMERCIAL LIST RE: Attorney General of Canada, Applicant

More information

WORKPLACE INVESTIGATIONS: Guidance to the Canadian Human Rights Commission from the Federal Court

WORKPLACE INVESTIGATIONS: Guidance to the Canadian Human Rights Commission from the Federal Court The Canadian Bar Association 12 th Annual National Administrative Law and Labour & Employment Law CLE Conference November 25 26, 2011 Ottawa, Ontario WORKPLACE INVESTIGATIONS: Guidance to the Canadian

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Maxwell Properties Ltd. v. Mosaik Property Management Ltd., 2017 NSSC 81

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Maxwell Properties Ltd. v. Mosaik Property Management Ltd., 2017 NSSC 81 SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Maxwell Properties Ltd. v. Mosaik Property Management Ltd., 2017 NSSC 81 Date: 20170316 Docket: Hfx No. 458069 Registry: Halifax Between: Maxwell Properties Limited

More information

International Association of Refugee Law Judges Guidelines on the Judicial Approach to Expert Medical Evidence.

International Association of Refugee Law Judges Guidelines on the Judicial Approach to Expert Medical Evidence. International Association of Refugee Law Judges Guidelines on the Judicial Approach to Expert Medical Evidence. 1. Introduction 1.1. The International Association of Refugee Law Judges (IARLJ) is committed

More information

LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT AND IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL REGARDING RICHARD MIRASTY

LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT AND IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL REGARDING RICHARD MIRASTY LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT AND IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL REGARDING RICHARD MIRASTY A MEMBER OF THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA Appeal to the Benchers Panel: Sandra L.

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: NBP v. Nova Scotia (Attorney General), 2017 NSSC 77 LIBRARY HEADING

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: NBP v. Nova Scotia (Attorney General), 2017 NSSC 77 LIBRARY HEADING SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: NBP v. Nova Scotia (Attorney General), 2017 NSSC 77 Date: 20170323 Docket: CRP No. 460481 Registry: Pictou Between: NBP Applicant v. The Attorney General of Nova

More information

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 955/09

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 955/09 WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 955/09 BEFORE: J. Josefo: Vice-Chair HEARING: May 13, 2009 at Ottawa Oral DATE OF DECISION: June 16, 2009 NEUTRAL CITATION: 2009 ONWSIAT 1450

More information

PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW SUMMARY 2011

PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW SUMMARY 2011 PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW SUMMARY 2011 LAWSKOOL CANADA CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION TO PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW... 5 1.1 WHAT IS PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW?... 5 1.2 TERRITORIAL DIMENSIONS OF PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL

More information

On December 14, 2011, the B.C. Court of Appeal released its judgment

On December 14, 2011, the B.C. Court of Appeal released its judgment LIMITATION PERIODS ON DEMAND PROMISSORY NOTES: THE SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKING THE NOTE PAYABLE A FIXED PERIOD AFTER DEMAND By Georges Sourisseau and Russell Robertson On December 14, 2011, the B.C. Court of

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA FAMILY DIVISION Citation: Nova Scotia (Maintenance Enforcement) v. Hill, 2017 NSSC 112

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA FAMILY DIVISION Citation: Nova Scotia (Maintenance Enforcement) v. Hill, 2017 NSSC 112 SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA FAMILY DIVISION Citation: Nova Scotia (Maintenance Enforcement) v. Hill, 2017 NSSC 112 Date: 2017-03-13 Docket: SFSNMEA No. 098947 Registry: Sydney Between: Director Maintenance

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Healy v. Halifax (Regional Municipality), 2017 NSSC 83

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Healy v. Halifax (Regional Municipality), 2017 NSSC 83 SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Healy v. Halifax (Regional Municipality), 2017 NSSC 83 Date: 2017-03-24 Docket: Halifax Nos. 328081, 328082, 328084, 328086, 328092, 328093, 328094, 328095, 328096,

More information

HEARD: November 14, 2014, December 17, 2014, February 6, 2015 ENDORSEMENT

HEARD: November 14, 2014, December 17, 2014, February 6, 2015 ENDORSEMENT SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO CITATION: Markoulakis v. SNC-Lavalin Inc., 2015 ONSC 1081 COURT FILE NO.: CV-14-504720 DATE: 20150416 RE: Eftihios (Ed) Markoulakis, Plaintiff, AND: SNC-Lavalin Inc.,

More information

DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROVISIONS OF THE CANADA-UNITED STATES FREE TRADE AGREEMENT

DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROVISIONS OF THE CANADA-UNITED STATES FREE TRADE AGREEMENT DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROVISIONS OF THE CANADA-UNITED STATES FREE TRADE AGREEMENT David P. Cluchey* Dispute resolution is a major focus of the recently signed Canada- United States Free Trade Agreement. 1

More information

Overlapping Jurisdiction and Ontario s New Human Rights Code. CBA Elder Law Conference. June 12, 2009

Overlapping Jurisdiction and Ontario s New Human Rights Code. CBA Elder Law Conference. June 12, 2009 Overlapping Jurisdiction and Ontario s New Human Rights Code CBA Elder Law Conference June 12, 2009 David A. Wright Vice-Chair Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario Overlapping Jurisdiction and Ontario s New

More information

Consultation with First Nations and Accommodation Obligations

Consultation with First Nations and Accommodation Obligations Consultation with First Nations and Accommodation Obligations John J.L. Hunter, Q.C. prepared for a conference on the Impact of the Haida and Taku River Decisions presented by the Pacific Business and

More information

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE. ) ) Plaintiffs ) ) ) Defendant ) ) DECISION ON MOTION:

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE. ) ) Plaintiffs ) ) ) Defendant ) ) DECISION ON MOTION: CITATION: Rush v. Via Rail Canada Inc., 2017 ONSC 2243 COURT FILE NO.: CV-14-507160 DATE: 20170518 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN: Yael Rush and Thomas Rush Plaintiffs and Via Rail Canada Inc.

More information

IN THE MATTER OF THE SECURITIES ACT S.N.B and - IN THE MATTER OF

IN THE MATTER OF THE SECURITIES ACT S.N.B and - IN THE MATTER OF IN THE MATTER OF THE SECURITIES ACT S.N.B. 2004 - and - IN THE MATTER OF INTERCONTINENTAL TRADING GROUP S.A., RON WALLACE AND GARY MCCORY (RESPONDENTS) Date of Hearing: November 18, 2009 Date of Order:

More information

Overview of the Appeal Process for Veterans Claims

Overview of the Appeal Process for Veterans Claims Overview of the Appeal Process for Veterans Claims Daniel T. Shedd Legislative Attorney July 16, 2012 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Congressional Research Service

More information

EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT NO. 55 OF 1998

EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT NO. 55 OF 1998 EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT NO. 55 OF 1998 [ASSENTED TO 12 OCTOBER, 1998] [DATE OF COMMENCEMENT: 1 DECEMBER, 1999] (Unless otherwise indicated) (English text signed by the President) This Act has been updated

More information

THE FALSE ALLURE OF ARBITRATION APPEALS

THE FALSE ALLURE OF ARBITRATION APPEALS THE FALSE ALLURE OF ARBITRATION APPEALS Presented by: Joel Richler, FCIArb. Bay Street Chambers Ann Ryan Robertson, FCIArb. Locke Lord LLP David P. Jones, Q.C., C.Arb. de Villars Jones LLP The False Allure

More information

Session 2: Decision Writing: Making Your Decisions Appeal Proof. Moderator: Mark Nakamura, Health Professions Appeal and Review Board

Session 2: Decision Writing: Making Your Decisions Appeal Proof. Moderator: Mark Nakamura, Health Professions Appeal and Review Board Session 2: Decision Writing: Making Your Decisions Appeal Proof Moderator: Mark Nakamura, Health Professions Appeal and Review Board Speakers: Justice John Laskin, Ontario Court of Appeal Justice Anne

More information

Litigating Charter Rights: The Experience of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal

Litigating Charter Rights: The Experience of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal Advanced Workers Compensation Advocacy Litigating Charter Rights: The Experience of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal David Stratas Heenan Blaikie LLP Monday May 10, 2004 Ontario Bar

More information

CHEYENNE SANTANA MARIE FOX, DECEASED, JOHN GRAHAM TERRANCE FOX, ESTATE TRUSTEE OF THE ESTATE OF CHEYENNE SANTANA MARIE FOX

CHEYENNE SANTANA MARIE FOX, DECEASED, JOHN GRAHAM TERRANCE FOX, ESTATE TRUSTEE OF THE ESTATE OF CHEYENNE SANTANA MARIE FOX SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO CITATION: Fox v. Narine, 2016 ONSC 6499 COURT FILE NO.: CV-15-526934 DATE: 20161020 RE: CHEYENNE SANTANA MARIE FOX, DECEASED, JOHN GRAHAM TERRANCE FOX, ESTATE TRUSTEE

More information

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. CITATION: Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. The Queen, 2011 SCC 3 DATE: DOCKET: 32987

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. CITATION: Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. The Queen, 2011 SCC 3 DATE: DOCKET: 32987 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. The Queen, 2011 SCC 3 DATE: 20110128 DOCKET: 32987 BETWEEN: Canadian Broadcasting Corporation Appellant and Her Majesty The Queen and Stéphan

More information

Case Name: R. v. Stagg. Between Her Majesty the Queen, and Norman Stagg. [2011] M.J. No MBPC 9. Manitoba Provincial Court

Case Name: R. v. Stagg. Between Her Majesty the Queen, and Norman Stagg. [2011] M.J. No MBPC 9. Manitoba Provincial Court Page 1 Case Name: R. v. Stagg Between Her Majesty the Queen, and Norman Stagg [2011] M.J. No. 56 2011 MBPC 9 Manitoba Provincial Court B.M. Corrin Prov. Ct. J. February 11, 2011. (19 paras.) Counsel: Nathaniel

More information

MOMIN WALIULLAH. and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT

MOMIN WALIULLAH. and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT Federal Court Cour fédérale Montréal, Quebec, March 21, 2012 PRESENT: BETWEEN: The Honourable Madam Justice Tremblay-Lamer MOMIN WALIULLAH and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Date: 20120321

More information

The New Tricks and Traps of Human Rights Investigations. Association of Corporate Counsel- Ontario Chapter Program

The New Tricks and Traps of Human Rights Investigations. Association of Corporate Counsel- Ontario Chapter Program The New Tricks and Traps of Human Rights Investigations Association of Corporate Counsel- Ontario Chapter Program Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP 200 Bay Street, Suite 3800 Toronto, ON June 18, 2013 Overview

More information

RE: The Board s refusal to allow public access to the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain Hearings

RE: The Board s refusal to allow public access to the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain Hearings Direct Line: 604-630-9928 Email: Laura@bccla.org BY EMAIL January 20, 2016 Peter Watson, Chair National Energy Board 517 Tenth Avenue SW Calgary, Alberta T2R 0A8 RE: The Board s refusal to allow public

More information

EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT NO. 55 OF 1998

EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT NO. 55 OF 1998 EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT NO. 55 OF 1998 [View Regulation] [ASSENTED TO 12 OCTOBER, 1998] [DATE OF COMMENCEMENT: 1 DECEMBER, 1999] (Unless otherwise indicated) (English text signed by the President) This Act

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Jewell v. I-Flow, 2017 NSSC 54

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Jewell v. I-Flow, 2017 NSSC 54 SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Jewell v. I-Flow, 2017 NSSC 54 Date: 20170301 Docket: Tru No. 408788 Registry: Truro Between: Anne L. Jewell and Thurman M. Jewell, Parents of Leia Bettina Jewell,

More information

Indexed As: Halifax (Regional Municipality) Pension Committee v. State Street Bank and Trust Co. et al.

Indexed As: Halifax (Regional Municipality) Pension Committee v. State Street Bank and Trust Co. et al. The Halifax Regional Municipality Pension Committee (plaintiff) v. State Street Bank and Trust Company and State Street Global Advisors Ltd./Conseillers en Gestion State Street Ltée (defendants) (Hfx.

More information

ALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F January 12, 2017 ALBERTA HEALTH SERVICES. Case File Number F8441

ALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F January 12, 2017 ALBERTA HEALTH SERVICES. Case File Number F8441 ALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F2017-01 January 12, 2017 ALBERTA HEALTH SERVICES Case File Number F8441 Office URL: www.oipc.ab.ca Summary: Pursuant to the Freedom of

More information

Affidavits in Support of Motions

Affidavits in Support of Motions Affidavits in Support of Motions To be advised and verily believe or not to be advised and verily believe: That is the question Presented by: Robert Zochodne November 20, 2010 30 th Civil Litigation Updated

More information

Lobbyist Registration

Lobbyist Registration Alberta Government Services Alberta Government Services Registries & Consumer Services Major Projects 3rd floor, 10155 102 Street Edmonton, Alberta T5J 4L4 Phone (780) 427-0294 Lobbyist Registration..........

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Between: And Rose v. British Columbia Life & Casualty Company, 2012 BCSC 1296 Lana Rose Date: 20120904 Docket: S098365 Registry: Vancouver Plaintiff British

More information

OUTLINE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IN JAPAN CONTENTS

OUTLINE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IN JAPAN CONTENTS OUTLINE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IN JAPAN CONTENTS I. Civil suits A. Types of civil suits B. Procedure for civil suits 1. Jurisdiction and court of first instance a. Jurisdiction b. Court 2. Court proceedings

More information

ORDER NO September 2010

ORDER NO September 2010 Arbitration under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules BRITISH CARIBBEAN BANK LTD. (CLAIMANT) V. THE GOVERNMENT OF BELIZE (RESPONDENT) ORDER NO. 1 6 September 2010 CONSIDERING: (A) (B) The notice for the Preparatory

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Daryl-Evans v. Empl. Standards Date: 20020111 2002 BCSC 48 Docket: L003189 Registry: Vancouver IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA BETWEEN: DARYL-EVANS MECHANICAL LTD. AND: PETITIONER DIRECTOR

More information

Health Professions Review Board

Health Professions Review Board Health Professions Review Board Suite 900, 747 Fort Street Victoria British Columbia Telephone: 250 953-4956 Toll Free: 1-888-953-4986 (within BC) Facsimile: 250 953-3195 Mailing Address: PO 9429 STN PROV

More information

Guide to Litigation in Canada. Guide to Litigation in Canada 1

Guide to Litigation in Canada. Guide to Litigation in Canada 1 Guide to Litigation in Canada Guide to Litigation in Canada 1 CONTENTS Introduction: Litigating in Canada... 3 Litigation in Each Province Alberta... 4 British Columbia... 8 Manitoba... 11 New Brunswick...

More information

Religious Freedom and the State in Canada and the U.S.: A Comparative Analysis of Saguenay, Town of Greece, Loyola, and Hobby Lobby

Religious Freedom and the State in Canada and the U.S.: A Comparative Analysis of Saguenay, Town of Greece, Loyola, and Hobby Lobby Religious Freedom and the State in Canada and the U.S.: A Comparative Analysis of Saguenay, Town of Greece, Loyola, and Hobby Lobby Prepared For: Legal Education Society of Alberta Constitutional Law Symposium

More information

SUBMISSIONS OF THE CANADIAN BAR ASSOCIATION (BRITISH COLUMBIA BRANCH) BRITISH COLUMBIA 2016 JUDICIAL COMPENSATION COMMISSION

SUBMISSIONS OF THE CANADIAN BAR ASSOCIATION (BRITISH COLUMBIA BRANCH) BRITISH COLUMBIA 2016 JUDICIAL COMPENSATION COMMISSION ! SUBMISSIONS OF THE CANADIAN BAR ASSOCIATION (BRITISH COLUMBIA BRANCH) TO THE BRITISH COLUMBIA 2016 JUDICIAL COMPENSATION COMMISSION Issued By: Canadian Bar Association British Columbia Branch June 2016

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF RIO ARRIBA COUNTY Sheri A. Raphaelson, District Judge

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF RIO ARRIBA COUNTY Sheri A. Raphaelson, District Judge IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO Opinion Number: 2017-NMCA-013 Filing Date: October 26, 2016 Docket No. 34,195 IN RE: THE PETITION OF PETER J. HOLZEM, PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE

More information

HOME INVASIONS FIRST ISSUED: APRIL 3, 2000 LAST SUBSTANTIVE REVISION: APRIL 3, 2000

HOME INVASIONS FIRST ISSUED: APRIL 3, 2000 LAST SUBSTANTIVE REVISION: APRIL 3, 2000 DOCUMENT TITLE: HOME INVASIONS NATURE OF DOCUMENT: AG DIRECTIVE FIRST ISSUED: APRIL 3, 2000 LAST SUBSTANTIVE REVISION: APRIL 3, 2000 EDITED / DISTRIBUTED: SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 NOTE: THIS POLICY DOCUMENT IS

More information

Practice Directions Directives de procédure

Practice Directions Directives de procédure Practice Directions Directives de procédure Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal Tribunal d appel de la sécurité professionnelle et de l assurance contre les accidents du travail PRACTICE DIRECTIONS

More information

STATUS HEARINGS UNDER RULE 48.14

STATUS HEARINGS UNDER RULE 48.14 Volume 20, No. 4 June 2012 Civil Litigation Section STATUS HEARINGS UNDER RULE 48.14 Philip Cho Although entirely replaced in the 2010 amendments, unlike the transition provision under Rule 48.15, 1 status

More information

SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSOCIATION OF PRESIDING JUSTICES OF THE PEACE AND THE ASSOCIATION OF THE SITTING JUSTICES OF THE PEACE

SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSOCIATION OF PRESIDING JUSTICES OF THE PEACE AND THE ASSOCIATION OF THE SITTING JUSTICES OF THE PEACE 2006 ALBERTA JUSTICES OF THE PEACE COMPENSATION COMMISSION FOR THE PERIOD APRIL 1,2003 TO MARCH 31,2008 THE ALBERTA ASSOCIATION OF PRESIDING JUSTICES OF THE PEACE -and- THE ALBERTA ASSOCIATION OF SITTING

More information

BYLAWS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS TAHOE FOREST HOSPITAL DISTRICT

BYLAWS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS TAHOE FOREST HOSPITAL DISTRICT BYLAWS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS TAHOE FOREST HOSPITAL DISTRICT Table of Contents ARTICLE I. NAME, AUTHORITY AND PURPOSE... 1 Section 1. Name... 1 Section 2. Authority... 1 Section 3. Purpose and Operating

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Between: Gorenshtein v. British Columbia (Employment Standards Tribunal), 2013 BCSC 1499 Date: 20130819 Docket: S130604 Registry: Vancouver Tatiana Gorenshtein

More information

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 01/25/17 Page 1 of 11. : : Petitioner, : : Respondent.

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 01/25/17 Page 1 of 11. : : Petitioner, : : Respondent. Case 117-cv-00554 Document 1 Filed 01/25/17 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------------------ x ORACLE CORPORATION,

More information

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO INTERIM DECISION

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO INTERIM DECISION HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO B E T W E E N: Kristen Worley -and- Applicants Ontario Cycling Association, Cycling Canada Cyclisme, International Olympic Committee and Union Cycliste Internationale Respondents

More information

DEVELOPMENTS IN JUDICIAL REVIEW IN THE CONTEXT OF IMMIGRATION CASES. A Comment Prepared for the Judicial Conference of Australia's Colloquium 2003

DEVELOPMENTS IN JUDICIAL REVIEW IN THE CONTEXT OF IMMIGRATION CASES. A Comment Prepared for the Judicial Conference of Australia's Colloquium 2003 DEVELOPMENTS IN JUDICIAL REVIEW IN THE CONTEXT OF IMMIGRATION CASES A Comment Prepared for the Judicial Conference of Australia's Colloquium 2003 DARWIN - 30 MAY 2003 John Basten QC Dr Crock has provided

More information

Case 1:09-cv SAS Document 59-1 Filed 06/28/11 Page 1 of 9 EXHIBIT A

Case 1:09-cv SAS Document 59-1 Filed 06/28/11 Page 1 of 9 EXHIBIT A Case 1:09-cv-10087-SAS Document 59-1 Filed 06/28/11 Page 1 of 9 EXHIBIT A Case 1:09-cv-10087-SAS Document 59-1 Filed 06/28/11 Page 2 of 9 BETWEEN EXHIBIT "A" CANADIAN PRE-APPROVAL ORDER ONTARIO SUPERIOR

More information

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RESPONDENT S FACTUM

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RESPONDENT S FACTUM C.A. N o A-093-17 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO BETWEEN: The CITY OF THUNDER BAY, ONTARIO (Appellant) - and - MICHELLE RAINFOOT DAVID MORRISON (Respondents) RESPONDENT S FACTUM O Neill and Pray 1267 Chapman

More information

Several years ago, Canada s Parliament identified two concerns with our justice system as it applies to sentencing:

Several years ago, Canada s Parliament identified two concerns with our justice system as it applies to sentencing: The Conditional Sentence Option Chief Justice Michael MacDonald Chief Justice of Nova Scotia May 2003, Updated August 2013 As a result of an amendment made to the Criminal Code in 1996, judges are now

More information

Re: Dr Jonathan Richard Ashton v GMC [2013] EWHC 943 Admin

Re: Dr Jonathan Richard Ashton v GMC [2013] EWHC 943 Admin Appeals Circular A11/13 14 06 2013 To: Fitness to Practise Panel Panellists Legal Assessors Copy: Interim Orders Panel Panellists Investigation Committee Panellists Panel Secretaries Medical Defence Organisations

More information

1. BG s Constitution, its Regulations and the various conditions of membership, registration and affiliation together require that:

1. BG s Constitution, its Regulations and the various conditions of membership, registration and affiliation together require that: British Gymnastics Complaints & Disciplinary Procedures These procedures were amended on Thursday 21 st February 2013 and approved by the Ethics and Welfare Committee. All previous procedures are superseded

More information

Decision F07-03 MINISTRY OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. David Loukidelis, Information and Privacy Commissioner. June 22, 2007

Decision F07-03 MINISTRY OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. David Loukidelis, Information and Privacy Commissioner. June 22, 2007 Decision F07-03 MINISTRY OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT David Loukidelis, Information and Privacy Commissioner June 22, 2007 Quicklaw Cite: [2007] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 14 Document URL: http://www.oipc.bc.ca/orders/other_decisions/decisionfo7-03.pdf

More information

Legal Profession Act

Legal Profession Act Legal Profession Act S.N.S. 2004, c 28, as amended by S.N.S. 2010, c 56 This is an unofficial office consolidation. Consult the consolidated statutes of the Legislative Counsel Office. An Act Respecting

More information

Case Name: Beiko v. Hotel Dieu Hospital St. Catharines

Case Name: Beiko v. Hotel Dieu Hospital St. Catharines Page 1 Case Name: Beiko v. Hotel Dieu Hospital St. Catharines Between Dr. George Beiko, Dr. Lawrence Aedy, Dr. Bruce Lennox and Dr. Gerald Scaife, Plaintiffs/Respondents, and Hotel Dieu Hospital St. Catharines,

More information

MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCES: HANDCUFFING THE PRISONER OR THE JUDGE?

MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCES: HANDCUFFING THE PRISONER OR THE JUDGE? MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCES: HANDCUFFING THE PRISONER OR THE JUDGE?.THE CANADIAN EXPERIENCE SO FAR American Judges Association, Annual Educational Conference October 7, 2014 Las Vegas, Nevada Judge Catherine

More information

Introduction to the A-BBPP Draft Program Agreement December 19, 2017 updated January 8, 2018

Introduction to the A-BBPP Draft Program Agreement December 19, 2017 updated January 8, 2018 Introduction to the A-BBPP Draft Program Agreement December 19, 2017 updated January 8, 2018 Background On August 14, 2017, the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change sent a letter to the Resource

More information

(1 August 2014 to date) EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT 55 OF (Gazette No , Notice No dated 19 October 1998.

(1 August 2014 to date) EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT 55 OF (Gazette No , Notice No dated 19 October 1998. (1 August 2014 to date) [This is the current version and applies as from 1 August 2014, i.e. the date of commencement of the Employment Equity Amendment Act 47 of 2013 to date] EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT 55

More information

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. CITATION: R. v. Riesberry, 2015 SCC 65 DATE: DOCKET: 36179

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. CITATION: R. v. Riesberry, 2015 SCC 65 DATE: DOCKET: 36179 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: R. v. Riesberry, 2015 SCC 65 DATE: 20151218 DOCKET: 36179 BETWEEN: Derek Riesberry Appellant and Her Majesty The Queen Respondent CORAM: Cromwell, Moldaver, Karakatsanis,

More information

BILL NO. 42. Health Information Act

BILL NO. 42. Health Information Act HOUSE USE ONLY CHAIR: WITH / WITHOUT 4th SESSION, 64th GENERAL ASSEMBLY Province of Prince Edward Island 63 ELIZABETH II, 2014 BILL NO. 42 Health Information Act Honourable Doug W. Currie Minister of Health

More information

Introduction 2. What is Self-representation? 2. Who Can Self-represent? 2. Help for Self-represented Litigants 3

Introduction 2. What is Self-representation? 2. Who Can Self-represent? 2. Help for Self-represented Litigants 3 Self-representation CHAPTER CONTENTS Introduction 2 What is Self-representation? 2 Who Can Self-represent? 2 Help for Self-represented Litigants 3 Practical Tips for Self-represented Litigants 4 Resources

More information

ACCENTURE SCA, ACCENTURE INTERNATIONAL SARL AND ACCENTURE INC. PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE AND UNDERTAKING OF ACCENTURE SCA

ACCENTURE SCA, ACCENTURE INTERNATIONAL SARL AND ACCENTURE INC. PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE AND UNDERTAKING OF ACCENTURE SCA ACCENTURE SCA, ACCENTURE INTERNATIONAL SARL AND ACCENTURE INC. PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE AND UNDERTAKING OF ACCENTURE SCA GUARANTEE, dated as of January 31, 2003 (this Guarantee ), made by ACCENTURE INTERNATIONAL

More information

Case Name: Cuddy Chicks Ltd. v. Ontario (Labour Relations Board)

Case Name: Cuddy Chicks Ltd. v. Ontario (Labour Relations Board) Page 1 Case Name: Cuddy Chicks Ltd. v. Ontario (Labour Relations Board) Cuddy Chicks Limited, appellant; v. Ontario Labour Relations Board and United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local

More information

NYPSCB Code of Ethical Conduct & Disciplinary Procedures

NYPSCB Code of Ethical Conduct & Disciplinary Procedures NYPSCB Code of Ethical Conduct & 11 North Pearl Street, Suite 801 Albany New York 12207 Phone: 518.426.0945 Fax: 518.426.1046 www.nypeerspecialist.org The mission of the NYPSCB - is to preserve the integrity

More information

TRADEMARK POST-DELEGATION DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEDURE (TRADEMARK PDDRP) 4 JUNE 2012

TRADEMARK POST-DELEGATION DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEDURE (TRADEMARK PDDRP) 4 JUNE 2012 TRADEMARK POST-DELEGATION DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEDURE (TRADEMARK PDDRP) 4 JUNE 2012 1. Parties to the Dispute The parties to the dispute will be the trademark holder and the gtld registry operator. ICANN

More information

The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act

The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND 1 The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act being Chapter of the Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1990-91, as amended by the Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1992, c.62; 1994,

More information

WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL PRACTICE MANUAL

WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL PRACTICE MANUAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL PRACTICE MANUAL (revised July 2016) 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.00 The Workers Compensation Appeals Tribunal 1.10 Introduction 1.11 Definitions 1.20 Role of the Tribunal

More information

TO JR OR NOT TO JR? A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO ASSESSING THE MERITS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW IN THE IMMIGRATION CONTEXT. Last updated: November 2012

TO JR OR NOT TO JR? A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO ASSESSING THE MERITS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW IN THE IMMIGRATION CONTEXT. Last updated: November 2012 TO JR OR NOT TO JR? A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO ASSESSING THE MERITS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW IN THE IMMIGRATION CONTEXT Last updated: November 2012 Warren L. Creates, B.A., LL.B. and Jacqueline J. Bonisteel, M.A.,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS JOINT PRELIMINARY STATUS REPORT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS JOINT PRELIMINARY STATUS REPORT IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS ) THE WESTERN SHOSHONE ) IDENTIFIABLE GROUP, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Case No. 06-cv-00896L ) Judge Edward J. Damich THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

More information

( ) Page: 1/26 INDONESIA IMPORTATION OF HORTICULTURAL PRODUCTS, ANIMALS AND ANIMAL PRODUCTS AB Report of the Appellate Body.

( ) Page: 1/26 INDONESIA IMPORTATION OF HORTICULTURAL PRODUCTS, ANIMALS AND ANIMAL PRODUCTS AB Report of the Appellate Body. WT/DS477/AB/R/Add.1 WT/DS478/AB/R/Add.1 9 November 2017 (17-6042) Page: 1/26 Original: English INDONESIA IMPORTATION OF HORTICULTURAL PRODUCTS, ANIMALS AND ANIMAL PRODUCTS AB-2017-2 Report of the Appellate

More information

IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Cite as: Eastpoint Engineering Ltd. v. Fisher, 2017 NSSM 51 REASONS FOR DECISION

IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Cite as: Eastpoint Engineering Ltd. v. Fisher, 2017 NSSM 51 REASONS FOR DECISION BETWEEN: Claim No: SCCH - 464447 IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Cite as: Eastpoint Engineering Ltd. v. Fisher, 2017 NSSM 51 EASTPOINT ENGINEERING LTD. Claimant - and - COLIN SCOTT FISHER Defendant

More information

COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINE PROCESS

COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINE PROCESS COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINE PROCESS Approved by CPHR SASKATCHEWAN Board as of September 18, 2009 Updated COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINE PROCESS I Introduction 2 II Definitions 2 III Establishment of CPHR SASKATCHEWAN

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 04-0798 (PLF) ) ALL ASSETS HELD AT BANK JULIUS, ) Baer & Company, Ltd., Guernsey

More information

ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES CONSULTATION PAPER

ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES CONSULTATION PAPER ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES CONSULTATION PAPER LAW REFORM COMMISSION OF SASKATCHEWAN June, 2009 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Administrative penalties are a new means of enforcing compliance with regulatory legislation.

More information