INDEX

PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS
SOURCES OF PROCEDURAL OBLIGATIONS
---------------------------------------------------------------------------1
Enabling Legislation
Sub-ordinate Legislation
Policies and Guidelines
Procedural Statutes
Common Law
Procedural Obligation Triggers (Knight "Three-Prong" and "Legitimate Expectation")
-------------------2
THREE PRONG
TEST---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3
Nature of the decision (Admin/ Judicial/Quasi)
Relationship existing between that body and the individual:
Effect of that decision on the individual's rights (privileges / interests)
INVESTIGATIONS------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5
EMERGENCIES
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7
LEGITIMATE
EXPECTATION-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7
Requirements for Legitimate Expectation:
Legitimate Expectation Does not apply to:
CABINET DECISIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------10
MUNICIPAL BYLAW--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------11
POLICY MAKING/PUBLIC INTEREST GROUPS

REGULATED INDUSTRIES AND PRODUCERS

--------------------------------------------------------------------------12

PROCEDURAL OBLIGATION TRIGGERS (CHARTER & BILL OF

RIGHTS)-----------------------------13
Section 7 of Charter:
Section 1(a) of Bill of Rights:
Section 2(e) of Bill of Rights
Charkaoui v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and
Immigration)-------------------------------------------------18
ECONOMIC WELLBEING/ MENTAL AND PHYSICAL WELLBEING (Property Right)
----------------------------21
BAKER V. MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP &
IMMIGRATION--------------------------------------------------------------26
5 Factors for determination the contents of Procedural Fairness
-------------------------------------27
I. Nature of the decision and the process followed in making it
II. Nature of statutory scheme/statute - the decision maker operates
III. Importance of decision to individual
IV. Legitimate expectations
V. The choices of procedure
Suresh v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
-------------------------------------------------- 29
SPECIFIC CONTENT ISSUES
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------30
PRE HEARING ISSUES
Notice
Form of Notice
Manner of Notice
Canada (AG) v Canada (Commission of Inquiry on the Blood System in Canada)
--------------------------- 31

33
34

Discovery (of relevant information)-----------------------------------------------------

Delay -------------------------------------------------------------------------

ACTUAL HEARING
Oral Hearings (face to face encounter with decision-maker or delegate)
Khan v. University of
Ottawa----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------35

Open Hearings (Freedom Of The

Press)--------------------------------------------------- 36
Right To Counsel
Disclosure and Official Notice
----------------------------------------------------------------------- 39
Access to Information Statutes
Crown or Executive Privilege
Other Common Law Evidential Privileges
Access to Agency Information
--------------------------------------------------------------40
Gallant v. Canada (Deputy Commissioner, Correctional Service Canada) (1989)
------------------------------ 42
Admissibility Of Evidence
--------------------------------------------------------------------44
Cross-Examination
---------------------------------------------------------------------------45
POST HEARING ISSUES
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------46
Duty to Give Reasons
Disadvantages to give reasons
Advantages to give reasons
Ground on reasons required
Ratio (reasoning behind the judjement)

-----------------------------------------49
Via Rail Case
Effect of breach of duty to give reasons
CONTENT OF PROCEDURAL OBLIGATIONS (UNBIASED DECISION-MAKER)
-------------------------------------51
Antagonism (Dislike) during the hearing
Association between Party and Decision-maker (personal relationship)
-------------------------53
Involvement of Decision Maker in Earlier State of Process (Prior involvement)
----------------- 54
Statutory Authorization (response to allegation of bias, that you has statutory authority)
-------- 55

Attitudinal Bias (behavior towards outcome) (pre-disposition- mind set)

-----------------------58
Pecuniary and other material interests
-----------------------------------------------------------------60
Variations in Standards
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 61
Independence
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------65
CONTENT OF PROCEDURAL OBLIGATIONS (Issues arising from institutional (unbiased) decisionmaking) ---68
Delegation (power delegated) -----------------------------------------------69
Deciding without hearing ---------------------------70
Delegating duty to hear
Consultations among Agency Members ------------------------71
Agency Counsel ---------------------------------76
Agency Guidelines------------------------------ 78
Pros and Cons of Institutional Decision Making through Guidelines

THE STANDARD OF REVIEW ANALYSIS ---------------------------------80

General Introduction
Privative Clauses
Constitutional Limitation of Privative Clauses--------------------81
Courts and Tribunals: Constitutional Background ------------------82
"Protection against Judicial Review"- Harry Arthurs, ----------------------86
Favors on the limitations and restraints upon JR:
The "Preliminary Question" Doctrine

Wrong Questions and Irrelevant Considerations -------------------------------87

CUPE v. New Brunswick Liquor Corp, [1979] 2 SCR 227 (CBp.714)
-----------------------------------88
Pragmatic and Functional Approach 90

10. Evolution of the Standard of Review Analysis -----------91

Canada v. Southam Inc. [1997] SCC ---------92

Pushpanathan v. Canada [1998] SCC ----------------94

Abuse of discretion as a ground of Judicial Review

Suresh v. Canada [2002] SCC ------------------99

Failure to consider relevant factors ------------------103
Multiple purposes and considerations -----------104
Professional licensing and the Relevancy Principle
Delegated Legislation
Unreviewable Discretionary Powers?

The Current Test (Dunsmuir) --------------------106

(1)Defining the Concepts of Reasonableness and Correctness -------------108

(2)Determining the Appropriate Standard of Review

Standard of review analysis
--------------------------------------------------------------109
LINGERING QUESTIONS AFTER DUNSMUIR -----------112
REASONABLENESS REVIEW -----------------------------113

Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v Khosa 2009 SCC -----114

The Reasonableness of Giving Reasons -----------------------116
Concept of Jurisdictional Error ---------------------------118
A tribunal may exceed jurisdiction in one of two ways:------------119

Reasonablness analysis continued -------------------------------121

12. Venue and Basic Procedure for Judicial Review----------------127

STANDING IN JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS -------------------------------128
General

Three questions to ask about standing:-----------------------129

THE ROLE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ----------------------- 134
THE STATUS OF THE AUTHORITY UNDER ATTACK
ALLOCATION OF REVIEW AUTHORITY: federal court and provincial superior
courts ------ 136
The Federal Courts Act's Allocation of Jurisdiction as Between the Federal
Court and Provincial Courts
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 139
As Between the Federal Court and Federal Court of Appeal -------------------------------------140
Claims for damages in the Federal Court

REMEDY ----------------------------------------------------------------141

FORMS OF PERMANENT RELIEF

Certiorari
Prohibition
Mandamus
Declaration
Habeas Corpus
Statutory Appeals
Judicial Review -------------------------------- 142
Collateral Attack
Direct Attack
Effect of Certiorari Relief
Limits on Mandamus Relief
INTERIM AND INTERLOCUTORY RELIEF AND STAYS OF PROCEEDINGS ---------------- 144
Introduction
STAY OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS ------------------------------------------------------145
(1) The Usual Conditions for the Granting of a Stay
three main tests
(2) The Balance of Convenience and the Public Interest ---------------------------- 146
Difficulty or Impossibility to Decide the Merits at the Interlocutory Stage
The Consequences of Granting a Stay in Constitutional Cases
Conclusion
THE DISCRETION OF THE COURT (in grtanting relief) ----------------------------------------149
ALTERNATIVE REMEDIES -------------------------------150
Statutory Appeals -------------------------151
Statutory Appeal to the Courts (other appeals available)
Alternative Methods of Establishing Rights or Enforcing Observance of Statutes and
Orders

PREMATURITY -----------------------------------------------153
THE JURISPRUDENCE (of judicial review)
Mootness ( not significant for applicant)
Delay -------------------------------------------------------155
Five factors, whether a collateral attack is permissible
Misconduct of Applicant ------------------------------------157
Waiver
Balance of Convenience
MONEY REMEDIES ---------------------------------------------------------159
Remedy against the bureaucrats: ---------------------------------------------161
standards of conduct
programmed decisions
degree of discretion
nature of the private interest
unintentional nature of the government activity
nature of the government
the status or identity of the government actor
The availability of alternative sources of accountability
requirement of an individualized wrong
decision of the state to engage in certain activities
MONEYS MISTAKENLY PAID to and benefits mistakenly conferred on statutory
authorities -- 164
Passing-On Defence --------------------165
Application of the Doctrine of Protest and Compulsion
MONEY REMEDIES THROUGH JUDICIAL REVIEW
----------------------------------------------------166
TORT LIABILITY FOR UNLAWFUL ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION OR INACTION (Misfeasance)

Abuse of Power by Statutory Authorities ---------------------------------------------167

The Actions for Misfeasance (wrongful conduct by officer) in a Public Office ---170
(1) The Defining Elements of the Tort
(2) Application to the Case at Hand -----------------------------------------172
The four-step test -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------176
To determining whether damages were an appropriate and just measure to
recompensate