Sentences with phrase «on standard of review»

Why would Justice Khullar hedge somewhat on the standard of review applicable to a decision by a Tenancy Dispute Officer, particularly in light of the precedent in Hetland and the presumption (at para 17) most recently articulated by the Supreme Court of Canada in Edmonton (City) v Edmonton East (Capilano) Shopping Centres Ltd, 2016 SCC 47 (CanLII)(at paras 22 — 24) that the standard of review will be reasonableness where a statutory decision - maker applies and interprets its home statute?

The current case bears on the standard of review point.

In 2008, the Supreme Court of Canada essentially abandoned the old system and reconsidered the standard of review in Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick which has now arguably become one of the most commonly cited authorities on standard of review since... Read more

[xvi] On «disguised correctness», see David Mullan, «Unresolved Issues on Standard of Review in Canadian Judicial Review of Administrative Action — The Top Fifteen» (2013), 42 Adv. Q. 1.

[xviii] Robert Danay, «Quantifying Dunsmuir: An Empirical Analysis of the Supreme Court of Canada's Jurisprudence on Standard of Review» (2016) 66 UTLJ 555 and Diana Ginn, William Lahey, David Constantine and Nicholas Hooper, «How Has Dunsmuir Worked?

[49] Paul Daly, «Struggling Towards Coherence in Canadian Administrative Law: Recent Cases on Standard of Review and Reasonableness» (2016) 62 McGill Law Journal 527 at 558.

No matter how mad you [and your client] are about what the trial judge did, you have to focus on the standard of review.

In 2015 the Alberta Court of Appeal issued two decisions which suggested the Court is attempting to curtail the presumption of deference in the judicial review (or statutory appeal) of statutory tribunal decisions in this province: see Edmonton (East) Capilano Shopping Centres Ltd v Edmonton (City), 2015 ABCA 85 (CanLII)(Capilano, ABCA) which I commented on in Where Are We Going on Standard of Review in Alberta?

Irritated because on standard of review the Court seems literally incapable of a consistent and practical approach, while on solicitor - client privilege the Court has been so consistent that it risks fetishizing the significance of solicitor - client confidentiality to the point of jeopardizing other important legal interests.

On standard of review the Court needs to stop.

The Court of Appeal likewise ruled the applicable standard of review was correctness, but did so on very different grounds, which was the subject of my post in Where Are We Going on Standard of Review in Alberta?.

The Alberta Court of Appeal gave us a surprising new exception to the presumption of deference owed to statutory tribunals by ruling in Capilano, ABCA that the statutory right of appeal set out in section 470 of the Municipal Government Act demonstrates a legislative intent for an intrusive judicial role into municipal property tax assessment and therefore is an indication that the standard of review should be correctness (see Where Are We Going on Standard of Review in Alberta?

Could you help us on standard of review?»

After a couple of manhattans that evening, I tried all of my responses on Mr. Petrie who quickly surmised that if I couldn't get Mr. La Forest or him interested in my ideas on standard of review, my odds weren't good in front of nine judges who had plenty of ideas of their own.

There was no national importance to either of the issues that could impact Mr. Dunsmuir and Mr. Petrie was reluctant to rely on the standard of review.

Yes, this looks a lot like the Pushpanathan list of factors, [14] but the difference is that these factors are being considered not to decide on the standard of review — correctness, reasonableness and patent unreasonableness — but rather to determine the extent to which the court should defer to an administrative decision in the context of a particular case and a particular question — that is, the range of options that are legally open to the decision maker.

It is here where I think you can see the divide between the recent Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence and the direction of the Alberta Court of Appeal on standard of review.

Paul Daly, «Courts and Copyright: Some Thoughts on Standard of Review» in Michael Geist ed., The Copyright Pentalogy: How the Supreme Court of Canada Shook the Foundations of Canadian Copyright Law, University of Ottawa Press, Ottawa, 2013

Courts and Copyright: Some Thoughts on Standard of Review in Michael Geist ed., The Copyright Pentalogy: How the Supreme Court Shook the Foundations of Canadian Copyright Law (University of Ottawa Press, 2013).

The leading case on standard of review is Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick, 2008 SCC 9.

I can't resist passing on the postscript to Norman Siebrasse's excellent post on standard of review issues raised in a recent (and interesting) patent case at the Federal Court:

If one were — perhaps mischievously — to judge the Supreme Court's recent decisions on standard of review by reference to the virtues of justification, intelligibility, and transparency, one would have to conclude that the flaws in the Dunsmuir approach cause the Court to come up short.

These findings on standard of review are not only consistent with the overall trend in existing jurisprudence concerning the judicial review of FOIP decisions, but are also consistent with the trend towards reasonableness as the standard of review generally in substantive judicial review of statutory interpretation by administrative decision - makers.

I can't resist passing on the postscript to Norman Siebrasse's excellent post on standard of review issues raised in a recent (and interesting) patent case at the Federal Court: Finally, on a personal note, Dunsmuir was the clerk of the court in Fredericton, New Brunswick (the full name of the case is Dunsmuir v New Brunswick), and my wife and I were married in 2004 at the Fredericton City Hall, by David Dunsmuir, about a year before he was removed from office.

And Some Grumbling on Standard of Review Analysis

My comments start from three propositions which are rooted in constitutional theory: (1) absent constitutional objection, legislation binds; (2) administrative decision - makers enabled by statute can only go so far as their home statute allows (3) it is a court's job, on any standard of review, to enforce those boundaries; in American terminology, to «say what the law is» (Marbury v Madison; Edmonton East, at para 21).

I wish the crucial portions of Dunsmuir had been drafted with a bit more clarity, but nonetheless I would have thought the reasoning would do away with litigation on standard of review of the sort in this case.

The standard of review applicable to a ministerial decision that involves some interpretation or application of its «home» statute (s) seems to be a matter of question these days, notwithstanding that the Supreme Court of Canada attempted to simplify matters on standard of review with its 2008 decision in Dunsmuir v New Brunswick, 2008 SCC 9, [2008] 1 SCR 190.

The Supreme Court of Canada has been feverishly productive in the field of administrative law since the Fall of 2011, rendering decisions on standard of review (questions of law, jurisdictional error and labour arbitrators), the right to reasons, issue estoppel, attempts to pre-empt the administrative decision - making process, and review of municipal by - laws.

There is conflicting authority on the standard of review regarding the determination of the scope of consultation.

Historically, the LERB reviewed decisions of chiefs and presiding officers after initial investigations on a standard of review of correctness, using a de novo hearing — the appeal court refers to the lower tribunal's record to determine the facts, but will rule on the evidence and questions of law without deference (respectful submission to the judgment) to the lower tribunal's findings.

After the discussion and conclusion on standard of review, the court held that there was no reviewable error by the prothonotary and so the lower decisions would stand and the appeal dismissed.

Not exact matches

NBC News chairman Andrew Lack sent a memo to employees on Wednesday in which he said a recent complaint that a staffer sent to the network regarding Lauer «represented, after serious review, a clear violation of our company's standards.»

«We are confident that a thorough review of our track record over 30 years will underscore our commitment to upholding high broadcast standards, and will demonstrate that the transaction will not result in there being insufficient plurality in the UK,» the company said on Thursday.

In the realm of performance appraisal, HRM professionals must devise uniform appraisal standards, develop review techniques, train managers to administer the appraisals, and then evaluate and follow up on the effectiveness of performance reviews.

Panasonic's Eneloop batteries have long been the gold standard in this kind of tech, and they hold a 4.8 rating on Amazon after nearly 2,000 user reviews.

The 11 billion pound merger triggered the right for Lloyds and Scottish Widows, which is part of the British bank, to review an agreement struck in 2014 for Aberdeen to manage pension assets on behalf of Lloyds» insurance and wealth units as Standard Life is a «material competitor» to both.

After careful review and consideration of the comments, the Department is issuing this final rule that will (1) extend the applicability date of the Fiduciary Rule, the BIC Exemption, and the Principal Transactions Exemption for 60 days until June 9, 2017, and (2) require that fiduciaries relying on these exemptions for covered transactions adhere only to the «best interest» standard and the other Impartial Conduct Standards of these PTEs during a transition period from June 9, 2017, through January 1, 2018.

Finally, because the Impartial Conduct Standards will become applicable on June 9, 2017, the Department believes that firms will make efforts to adhere to those standards, motivated both by their applicability and by the prospect of their likely continuation, as well as by the impending applicability of complementary consumer protections and / or enforcement mechanisms beginning on January 1, 2018, depending on the results of the Department's review of the Fiduciary Rule pursuant to the President's Memorandum.

Americans for Annuity Protection has engaged in active outreach to leaders of influence to establish the argument that the DOL's fiduciary rule should be returned because of the analysis performed by the department is flawed, inconclusive and arbitrary; it is not compatible with the Uniform Security Law or established insurance law, and the law has potential conflict with the Dodd - Frank requirements to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on reviewing a uniform fiduciary standard.

BlackBerry's ability to manage inventory and asset risk; BlackBerry's reliance on suppliers of functional components for its products and risks relating to its supply chain; BlackBerry's ability to obtain rights to use software or components supplied by third parties; BlackBerry's ability to successfully maintain and enhance its brand; risks related to government regulations, including regulations relating to encryption technology; BlackBerry's ability to continue to adapt to recent board and management changes and headcount reductions; reliance on strategic alliances with third - party network infrastructure developers, software platform vendors and service platform vendors; BlackBerry's reliance on third - party manufacturers; potential defects and vulnerabilities in BlackBerry's products; risks related to litigation, including litigation claims arising from BlackBerry's practice of providing forward - looking guidance; potential charges relating to the impairment of intangible assets recorded on BlackBerry's balance sheet; risks as a result of actions of activist shareholders; government regulation of wireless spectrum and radio frequencies; risks related to economic and geopolitical conditions; risks associated with acquisitions; foreign exchange risks; and difficulties in forecasting BlackBerry's financial results given the rapid technological changes, evolving industry standards, intense competition and short product life cycles that characterize the wireless communications industry, and the company's previously disclosed review of strategic alternatives.

Based on our Business VoIP research, we created the ChooseWhat Market Standard, to which we compare the features of all the Business VoIP services we review.

Aldo has also spent two years as an independent risk consultant with a focus on internal controls and due diligence for fund of funds as well as reviewing transparency standards for fund of hedge funds.

On September 7, the publisher of the journal, the Council of the Biological Society of Washington, released a statement retracting the article as not having met its scientific standards and not peer reviewed.

This worthwhile collection, the outcome of a «Trinity Summit» held in New York at Easter 1998, differs from standard current books on the Trinity (see previous review) in two ways.

Before continuing to review the discussion as it has been carried on within Protestant theological circles, we may perhaps be permitted a brief excursus into the realm of Roman Catholic biblical scholarship, for Strauss's book produced an immediate reaction from a Roman Catholic New Testament professor in which what has come to be, to the best of our knowledge, the standard Roman Catholic viewpoint, was developed.

She serves on the Organic Material Review Institute Board of Directors in the OTA's designated seat and as Technical Representative in North America for the Global Organic Textile Standard.

«In reviewing our long - standing U.S. business in the wake of the many changes taking place, I felt that it was time to find our way back to a more traditional import partner who placed a strong emphasis on personalized relationships, who held professionalism to the highest level and who was committed to the highest standard of brand and people management possible,» commented Philippe Colin, Proprietor and Winemaker at Domaine Philippe Colin.

[Update: Post on the new standard and lack of shade canopy criteria here] The Sustainable Agriculture Network (SAN) is revising the standards used for Rainforest Alliance certification; this review process -LSB-...]

Kevin Mc Namara is rapporteur for an Australian Health Policy Collaboration working group, and a member of Standards Review Group Subcommittee F developing pharmacy practice standards around screening and risk assessment on behalf of the Pharmaceutical Society of Australia.