A recent decision of the Ontario Divisional Court, Ramkey v. Labourers International Union of North America et al, has provided employers performing work in support of federally regulated undertakings welcome clarity with respect to their status. The Court found that an employer (Ramkey) which provided construction technicians to work on telecommunications networks owned by telecommunications…
Tag: Judicial Review
Court Holds Judicial Review Not Available in Broader Public Sector Compensation Restraint Challenge
The Divisional Court recently issued an important decision, Association of Professors of the University of Ottawa v. University of Ottawa, with respect to the ability of a union to challenge a university’s determination of compensation payable to its non-unionized employees on the basis that the determination is contrary to the Broader Public Sector Accountability Act,…
Divisional Court Finds Breach of Sunset Clause Does Not Necessarily Render Employer Discipline Null and Void
In a decision dated April 17, 2018, the Divisional Court has invited arbitrators to reject the so-called “void ab initio” doctrine that in the past has often resulted in discipline imposed by management being rendered null and void due to the breach of a sunset clause or other similar provisions. Learn more in this FTR Now.
City Did Not Breach Duty to Accommodate When it Declined Firefighters’ Request for Exception to Mandatory Retirement Policy
In a recent decision, Corrigan v. Corporation of the City of Mississauga [1], the Divisional Court dismissed an application for judicial review of a decision of the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (the “Tribunal”), which found that the City of Mississauga did not breach its procedural duty to accommodate when it declined to accommodate suppression…
Divisional Court Upholds Jan Wong’s Obligation to Repay Settlement Funds for Breach of Confidentiality
The Ontario Divisional Court has unanimously upheld Arbitrator Louisa Davie’s decision that Jan Wong breached her confidentiality obligations under a settlement with her former employer, The Globe and Mail (the “Globe”) and is bound by the repayment obligation she agreed to as part of the settlement. The Court held that Ms Wong lacked standing to…
Decision of Private School Not Subject to Judicial Review
In an important decision on the reach of administrative law, the Court of Appeal for Ontario held that a private school’s decision to expel a student for smoking marijuana in his dorm room was not subject to judicial review by the courts. The private school, Appleby College, is incorporated by a Special Act of the…
Majority of SCC Finds Employer Exceeded its Management Rights in Implementing Random Alcohol Testing Policy
Today, a majority of the Supreme Court of Canada upheld an arbitration award which concluded that a random alcohol testing policy for use in a safety sensitive workplace was not justified. In the absence of evidence of an existing workplace alcohol use problem, it concluded that a dangerous workplace was not, on its own, reason…
Are Decisions of Private Schools Subject to Judicial Review? Does it Matter?
In the recent decision Setia v. Appleby College, a student at Appleby College, a private school in Oakville, was expelled “after he admitted to smoking marijuana in a friend’s dormitory the night before the final day of his sixth and final year at Appleby College.” The boy’s mother attempted to contact the principal, but “was…
2012 Spring Edition
FOCUS ON ADMINISTRATIVE LAW Judicial review – different litigation, different strategies LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS Is your business ready for a labour disruption? Standards for judicial review continue to evolve PROFILE Litigation in the fast lane Download PDF
Ontario Court Finds Decision of Human Rights Tribunal to be Factually and Legally Flawed
The Ontario Divisional Court has recently found that a decision of the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal was legally and factually unsupportable and that it was “simply not possible to logically follow the pathway taken by the adjudicator and to determine the reasonableness of the conclusions reached.” In Audmax v. Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario and…