Sentences with phrase «v alberta»

PDF Version: Confidentiality versus Access to Information Case commented on: Edmonton Police Service v Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2012 ABQB 595 Introduction In any society, a healthy balance is needed to protect personal and private information, whilst also allowing... Continue reading →

For instance, a discussion of the Election Act for Alberta was published in Engel v Alberta (Executive Council), 2015 ABQB 226 and includes a bit of legislative history.

Buffalo Trail Public Schools Regional Division No. 29 v Alberta Teachers Association, 2014 ABCA 407, Alberta Court of Appeal

Case commented on: Edmonton Police Service v Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2012 ABQB 595

In Allen v Alberta, 2015 ABCA 277, the Court held unanimously that the applicant hadn't provided a sufficient evidentiary basis for his challenge, and that it should have been brought by way of an action and adjudicated after a full trial.

In the recent decision of Edmonton Police Service v Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2012 ABQB 595 (Edmonton Police Service), the issue of keeping information confidential versus granting access to it was addressed by the Court of Queen's Bench.

As per counsel's interpretation of Dunsmuir v New Brunswick, 2008 SCC 9 (CanLII), Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v Alberta Teachers» Association, 2011 SCC 61 (CanLII) and Newfoundland and Labrador Nurses» Union v Newfoundland and Labrador (Treasury Board), 2011 SCC 62 (CanLII), where a tribunal is asked to determine its own jurisdiction over a matter (and interpret its home statute) these determinations are subject to deference on judicial review.

Here is an interesting case from Alberta, where administrative law and disability law intersect: Voropanov v Alberta (Municipal Affairs), 2012 ABQB 551.

Decision considered: Alberta Teachers» Association v Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2013 ABQB 106.

Alastair Lucas, Doctors Affected by Hospital Unit Closure Have Minimal Procedural Fairness Rights: Public Program Discretion Tops Individual Procedural Rights, a comment on MacDonald v Alberta Health Services, 2013 ABQB 404 (CanLII)

Moreover, the Court pointed to Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v Alberta Teachers» Association, 2011 SCC 61 for confirmation that the standard of reasonableness presumptively applies when the Commission is interpreting its home statute.

Now, in this case the Court of Appeal had clear guidance with respect to the fifth factor in the form of a recent Supreme Court of Canada decision — ATCO Gas and Pipelines Ltd v Alberta (Utilities Commission), 2015 SCC 45 — in which the Court found the standard to be applied to decisions of the Commission (when applying its expertise to set rates and approve payment amounts) is reasonableness.

, a comment on Coward v Alberta (Human Rights and Citizenship Commission, Chief Commissioner), 2008 ABQB 455 (CanLII)

For the Court of Appeal, the controversy in this case originated with the decision of Cunningham v Alberta (Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development), 2009 ABCA 239 (CanLII).

Decision considered: Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v Alberta Teachers» Association, 2011 SCC 61

Furthermore, the law governing the obligation of the Registrar to protect the integrity of membership lists had been dealt with in Gauchier v Alberta (Metis Settlements Land Registry), 2014 ABCA 356 (CanLII) and neither of the applicants could have been parties before the Tribunal.

Bich J.A. gave an affirmative answer: the correct way to assess procedural decisions is to apply the Dunsmuir framework — to look at issues «through the Dunsmuir lens» (ATCO Gas and Pipelines Ltd v Alberta (Utilities Commission), 2014 ABCA 397, at para. 66).

As previously mentioned, Mr. Caron was granted an interpreter for his human rights judicial review hearing, but was denied an order to get the records and related files translated into French (see Caron v Alberta (Human Rights and Citizenship Commission), 2007 ABQB 200).

The following list of factors (drawn from Pedersen v Alberta, 2008 ABCA 192 (CanLII) at para. 3, 432 AR 219 and Re Stewart Estate, 2014 ABCA 222 (CanLII) at para. 5, 577 AR 57) are relevant for making this determination:

Waap v Alberta, 2008 ABQB 544, when discussing the process for a judge to undergo when considering a non-suit application said at paragraph 135:

[17] More importantly, it was Rothstein J, in Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v Alberta Teachers» Association, [18] who questioned the need for retaining the category assigned to true jurisdictional questions.

This article discusses the role of the intervention of the Women's Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF) in the case of Vriend v Alberta, [1998] 1 SCR 493, a case which resulted in the SCC ordering the ground of «sexual orientation» to be read into Alberta's human rights legislation (then the Individual's Rights Protection Act).

The Court signalled in Canadian Western Bank v Alberta, 2007 SCC 22 (CanLII), that generally the use of the doctrine should be minimized since it is redolent of more rigid approaches to constitutional law that favour «watertight compartments» rather than the more modern cooperative federalism approach.

The Court of Appeal's decision in Sechelt was significant because it demonstrated that IJI was still alive and well in relation to the lands reserved head of s. 91 (24) following the efforts of the Supreme Court of Canada in a series of cases including Canadian Western Bank v Alberta, 2007 SCC 22 and British Columbia (Attorney General) v Lafarge Canada Inc, 2007 SCC 23 to limit the application of the IJI doctrine.

In JE v Alberta (Workers» Compensation Board), 2016 ABCA 147 (CanLII), Justice Veldhuis, sitting alone, considered an application to restore a worker's compensation appeal that was struck by the Registrar for failure to file the appeal record.

The Alberta Court of Appeal in Baier v Alberta, 2006 ABCA 137 at para 56, also appears to have accepted that agricultural workers may be a protected group under s. 15 (1).

Citing Berger v Alberta (Energy Resources Conservation Board), 2009 ABCA 158 (CanLII) at para. 2, and Wood Buffalo (Regional Municipality) v Alberta (Energy and Utilities Board), 2007 ABCA 192 (CanLII) at para. 5, the Court of Appeal stated that, in determining whether to grant permission, a court will consider the following issues:

By: Sarah Burton PDF Version: What Happens when a Self - Rep Steps on a Procedural Landmine during Judicial Review Case Commented On: Raczynska v Alberta Human Rights Commission, 2015 ABQB 494 The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench recently rejected an application... Continue reading →

An interesting question, answered in Edmonton (Police Service) v Alberta (Law Enforcement Review Board), 2014 ABCA 267.

In Laverick v Alberta (Transportation Safety Board), 2018 ABQB 57 (CanLII), Justice W. P. Sullivan acknowledged that a third - party applicant may argue for a stay of proceedings pursuant to section 24 (1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms against charges under section 88.1 of the Traffic Safety Act, RSA 2000, c T - 6 [TSA], the administrative license suspension («ALS») regime.

By: Jennifer Koshan PDF Version: Alberta Human Rights Act Applies to Condominium Corporations Case Commented On: Condominium Corporation No 052 0580 v Alberta (Human Rights Commission), 2016 ABQB 183 (CanLII) A few years ago I wrote a post arguing that... Continue reading →

In Moloney v Alberta (Administrator, Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Act), the Alberta government refused to issue a driver's licence to John Moloney because he has unpaid judgment for personal injury damages against him.

Then in 2011 Justice Rothstein, this time writing for the majority in Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v Alberta Teachers» Association, 2011 SCC 61, wrote that the principle of judicial deference asserted in Dunsmuir had evolved to the point where there is a presumption the standard of review is reasonableness where a statutory decision - maker applies and interprets its home statute (at para 39).

Kennedy's client, Maurice Stoney, brought an application in 1985 Sawridge Trust v Alberta (Public Trustee), 2017 to be added as a beneficiary of a trust set up for members of the Sawridge Band along with 10 other brothers and sisters.

n Baier v Alberta, 2007 SCC 31 [Baier], Justice Rothstein of the Supreme Court of Canada articulated a test for whether an underinclusive statutory platform of expression infringes section 2 (b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and thus whether a claimant has a positive entitlement to access that platform.

The recent Alberta Court of Appeal decision Styles v Alberta Investment Management Corporation has highlighted the inherent right of an employer to terminate employment without cause on reasonable notice or payment in lieu thereof.

The compelling logic of Delgamuukw on division of powers is now dismissed as leading to a number of «difficulties» (at para 133) and the startling conclusion that the doctrine of interjurisdictional immunity is not just out of fashion (we know that from cases like Canadian Western Bank v Alberta, 2007 SCC 22, although see paras 60 — 61 of that case on the application of the doctrine to the «Indian Cases»), but it has no role whatsoever to play in relation to aboriginal title lands (at para 151) and perhaps even more generally in relation to the entire head of power (see paras 140, 150).

Ms. Raczynska failed to name the correct party on her application for judicial review, and failed to repair this error or serve the Professional Corporation in the stipulated time frame (at paras 4, 5 citing Leon's Furniture Limited v Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2011 ABCA 94).

This question is at the forefront of Raczynska v Alberta Human Rights Commission.

This month, the Applicants in that challenge scored a big procedural victory that, while not determinative, bodes well for future of their challenge (see Barr v Alberta (Attorney General), 2016 ABQB 10).

JULY 2012: Mitchell Anderson, as part of a larger project in collaboration with Tides Canada reporting on Canada's transition to cleaner energy, travels to Norway and a files widely read stories on how that nation has gained far more wealth from its oil reserves than has Alberta.

Having a Alberta mate is one of the best ways that you can ever go about.

I had Alberta Clipper's cover designed by Andrew Brown of www.designforwriters.com and although the process was more challenging than I had imagined it might be, it was always fun because Andrew is such a nice guy.

In Alberta, we have the Alberta Law collection at Our Future Our Past: a searchable repository of bills, statutes, pre-Alberta ordinances, the Alberta Hansard and Alberta journals and the Alberta gazette.

PDF Version: Federal Court Grants Alberta Leave to Intervene in TransMountain Proceedings: Has Alberta Earned the Privilege?

Canadians won't have Alberta's oil revenues to help provide stability any more — it's time that we cut everything back and just live with what we've got for the next few years.

By: Shaun Fluker PDF Version: Federal Court Grants Alberta Leave to Intervene in TransMountain Proceedings: Has Alberta Earned the Privilege?

Cohabitation Agreement Here are some basic questions and answers about our Ontario Cohabitation Agreement (we also have an Alberta Cohabitation Agreement): Q # 1: What is a Cohabitation Agreement?

Having Alberta show us the way is sort of like Dean Martin giving the keynote address at the temperance league's annual dinner.

Not exact matches

Alberta's policy - makers are now considering the possibility CCS may not deliver everything they'd hoped.