«[T] he general understanding that parties to the original
proceedings are automatically to be named as respondents when these
proceedings are subject to
judicial review was developed in the context of
adversarial proceedings, in which the competing rights of two or more parties are adjudicated, and not necessarily where the
proceedings, as here, are in the nature of an inquiry,» she wrote.
In this case, the Board could participate without compromising the principles of finality and impartiality (at paras. 60 - 62) and, although Rothstein J. sounded a «note of caution» about the Board's suggestion that even if it lost on
judicial review it would reach the same result in fresh
proceedings, he felt «the Board generally acted in such a way as to present helpful argument in an
adversarial but respectful manner» (at para. 72).