Under this analysis, there is no need for an abstracted notion of expertise justifying a lawerly presumption of deference; nor is there a need for the labels of «reasonableness» or «correctness.» (ruleoflaw.ca)
The problem with the current presumption of deference is that it is based on expertise which may or may not be represented in statute. (ruleoflaw.ca)
Professor Olszynski's recent post succinctly describes how this decision has led to the accepted view that a Minister should not be considered in the same light as an adjudicative tribunal and thus should not enjoy the same presumption of deference when interpreting a «home» statute. (ablawg.ca)