The former employee relied on the following grounds in his judicial review:
bias of the adjudicator; fairness of the hearing; appropriateness of deciding the matter solely on the basis of abuse of process, and; whether the matter of genuineness of the emails was properly determined.
Not exact matches
Adjudicators must always be aware
of this and guard against their own
biases in assessing expert evidence.
Self - represented applicants at the Human Rights Tribunal
of Ontario have raised the issue
of bias directly or indirectly through expressed concerns about lawyers on the Tribunal's practice advisory committee appearing for respondents: see Guilmoutdinov v. Ontario College
of Teachers (2009 HRTO 2130), for example, where the
adjudicator noted that advisory committees were frequently used by tribunals to promote responsiveness to the communities they serve and concluded that membership on the committee did not create a reasonable apprehension
of bias.
A recent Federal Court decision that addressed allegations
of bias by an
adjudicator hearing a case under the unjust dismissal provisions
of the Canada Labour Code provides more comfort to
adjudicators who engage in med - arb.
In dismissing the application, the court noted its displeasure with the former employee's continued allegations
of fraud as well as the unfounded allegations
of bias against the
adjudicator:
One
of the allegations
of bias related to the fact that the
adjudicator had been a partner with the law firm representing the bank, some twelve years earlier.
The business case for civility by the
adjudicator is clear — crossing the line can result in a finding
of apprehension
of bias and a repeat
of a hearing (with a different
adjudicator).
For incivility that falls short
of bias, the costs are more intangible and will depend on who bears the brunt
of the disrespect
of an
adjudicator.
The mere fact that an
adjudicator determines a request for reconsideration
of his or her own decision does not, in and
of itself, create a reasonable apprehension
of bias in the context
of this legislative scheme.
She submits that the Tribunal's Practice Direction on reconsideration, specifically allowing
adjudicators to reconsider their own decisions, is insufficient to avoid the reasonable apprehension
of bias.
In requesting the amendment and relying on the amended document in rendering its decision, the
adjudicator gave the appearance
of bias.
Parties who raise issues
of conflict
of interest based on a past role
of an
adjudicator usually frame that objection as an allegation
of an apprehension
of bias.