Review of Administrative Decisions for Public Complaints (5:III) - Revision history

Nate Russell at 20:52, 27 November 2025

2025-11-27T20:52:42Z

LSLAP at 19:01, 13 October 2025

2025-10-13T19:01:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:01, 13 October 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= August ~~23,~~ 2025}}		{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= 11 August 2025}}
	{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = complaints}}		{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = complaints}}

Nate Russell: /* a) Judicial Review Procedure */

2025-10-03T22:37:51Z

a) Judicial Review Procedure

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:37, 3 October 2025
Line 39:		Line 39:
	The Community Legal Assistance Society (CLAS) has produced a self-help guide to filing for Judicial Review which is a helpful reference tool, including sample court forms for filing. Those looking to file for Judicial Review may want to reference this guide after reading the following information.		The Community Legal Assistance Society (CLAS) has produced a self-help guide to filing for Judicial Review which is a helpful reference tool, including sample court forms for filing. Those looking to file for Judicial Review may want to reference this guide after reading the following information.

	:David Mossop et al, ''Representing Yourself in a Judicial Review, 5th ed'' (Vancouver: Community Legal Assistance Society, 2015), online: https://judicialreviewbc.ca.		:David Mossop et al, ''Representing Yourself in a Judicial Review, 5th ed'' (Vancouver: Community Legal Assistance Society, 2015), online: [https://judicialreviewbc.ca www.judicialreviewbc.ca].

	A party applying for judicial review must first determine whether the Federal Court or a provincial superior court has the authority to decide on the matter. As a general rule, provincial jurisdiction includes tribunals established within provincial constitutional jurisdiction and tribunals created by the province due to a delegation of powers by the federal government.		A party applying for judicial review must first determine whether the Federal Court or a provincial superior court has the authority to decide on the matter. As a general rule, provincial jurisdiction includes tribunals established within provincial constitutional jurisdiction and tribunals created by the province due to a delegation of powers by the federal government.
Line 73:		Line 73:
	:While an application for judicial review is pending, existing orders from a tribunal must be obeyed, and the tribunal has the discretion to continue with the proceedings. However, an applicant can ask the court to stay the tribunal’s order or to prohibit the proceedings from continuing.		:While an application for judicial review is pending, existing orders from a tribunal must be obeyed, and the tribunal has the discretion to continue with the proceedings. However, an applicant can ask the court to stay the tribunal’s order or to prohibit the proceedings from continuing.

	:David Mossop et al, ''Representing Yourself in a Judicial Review'', 5th ed (Vancouver: Community Legal Assistance Society, 2015), online: https://judicialreviewbc.ca.		:David Mossop et al, ''Representing Yourself in a Judicial Review'', 5th ed (Vancouver: Community Legal Assistance Society, 2015), online: [https://judicialreviewbc.ca www.judicialreviewbc.ca].

	:'''(6) Evidence'''		:'''(6) Evidence'''
Line 83:		Line 83:
	:Applicants who cannot afford the filing fees for judicial review may apply for an indigency order pursuant to Rule 20-5 of the BC ''Supreme Court Civil Rules.'' Appendix C, Schedule 1 lists the fees payable to the Crown, unless otherwise provided by statute. Indigency status affords the applicant relief from all court fees and is available to those with low income and limited earning potential. Note that the process for indigency applications is complicated.		:Applicants who cannot afford the filing fees for judicial review may apply for an indigency order pursuant to Rule 20-5 of the BC ''Supreme Court Civil Rules.'' Appendix C, Schedule 1 lists the fees payable to the Crown, unless otherwise provided by statute. Indigency status affords the applicant relief from all court fees and is available to those with low income and limited earning potential. Note that the process for indigency applications is complicated.

	:David Mossop et al, ''Representing Yourself in a Judicial Review'', 5th ed (Vancouver: Community Legal Assistance Society, 2015), online: https://judicialreviewbc.ca.		:David Mossop et al, ''Representing Yourself in a Judicial Review'', 5th ed (Vancouver: Community Legal Assistance Society, 2015), online: [https://judicialreviewbc.ca www.judicialreviewbc.ca].

	==== b) Scope of Judicial Review ====		==== b) Scope of Judicial Review ====

Nate Russell: /* a) Judicial Review Procedure */

2025-10-03T22:35:40Z

a) Judicial Review Procedure

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:35, 3 October 2025
Line 39:		Line 39:
	The Community Legal Assistance Society (CLAS) has produced a self-help guide to filing for Judicial Review which is a helpful reference tool, including sample court forms for filing. Those looking to file for Judicial Review may want to reference this guide after reading the following information.		The Community Legal Assistance Society (CLAS) has produced a self-help guide to filing for Judicial Review which is a helpful reference tool, including sample court forms for filing. Those looking to file for Judicial Review may want to reference this guide after reading the following information.

	:David Mossop et al, ''Representing Yourself in a Judicial Review, 5th ed'' (Vancouver: Community Legal Assistance Society, 2015), online: [https://judicialreviewbc.ca/].		:David Mossop et al, ''Representing Yourself in a Judicial Review, 5th ed'' (Vancouver: Community Legal Assistance Society, 2015), online: https://judicialreviewbc.ca.

	A party applying for judicial review must first determine whether the Federal Court or a provincial superior court has the authority to decide on the matter. As a general rule, provincial jurisdiction includes tribunals established within provincial constitutional jurisdiction and tribunals created by the province due to a delegation of powers by the federal government.		A party applying for judicial review must first determine whether the Federal Court or a provincial superior court has the authority to decide on the matter. As a general rule, provincial jurisdiction includes tribunals established within provincial constitutional jurisdiction and tribunals created by the province due to a delegation of powers by the federal government.
Line 73:		Line 73:
	:While an application for judicial review is pending, existing orders from a tribunal must be obeyed, and the tribunal has the discretion to continue with the proceedings. However, an applicant can ask the court to stay the tribunal’s order or to prohibit the proceedings from continuing.		:While an application for judicial review is pending, existing orders from a tribunal must be obeyed, and the tribunal has the discretion to continue with the proceedings. However, an applicant can ask the court to stay the tribunal’s order or to prohibit the proceedings from continuing.

	:David Mossop et al, ''Representing Yourself in a Judicial Review'', 5th ed (Vancouver: Community Legal Assistance Society, 2015), online: [https://judicialreviewbc.ca/].		:David Mossop et al, ''Representing Yourself in a Judicial Review'', 5th ed (Vancouver: Community Legal Assistance Society, 2015), online: https://judicialreviewbc.ca.

	:'''(6) Evidence'''		:'''(6) Evidence'''
Line 83:		Line 83:
	:Applicants who cannot afford the filing fees for judicial review may apply for an indigency order pursuant to Rule 20-5 of the BC ''Supreme Court Civil Rules.'' Appendix C, Schedule 1 lists the fees payable to the Crown, unless otherwise provided by statute. Indigency status affords the applicant relief from all court fees and is available to those with low income and limited earning potential. Note that the process for indigency applications is complicated.		:Applicants who cannot afford the filing fees for judicial review may apply for an indigency order pursuant to Rule 20-5 of the BC ''Supreme Court Civil Rules.'' Appendix C, Schedule 1 lists the fees payable to the Crown, unless otherwise provided by statute. Indigency status affords the applicant relief from all court fees and is available to those with low income and limited earning potential. Note that the process for indigency applications is complicated.

	:David Mossop et al, ''Representing Yourself in a Judicial Review'', 5th ed (Vancouver: Community Legal Assistance Society, 2015), online: [https://judicialreviewbc.ca/].		:David Mossop et al, ''Representing Yourself in a Judicial Review'', 5th ed (Vancouver: Community Legal Assistance Society, 2015), online: https://judicialreviewbc.ca.

	==== b) Scope of Judicial Review ====		==== b) Scope of Judicial Review ====

LSLAP: /* b) Scope of Judicial Review */

2025-09-25T21:41:10Z

b) Scope of Judicial Review

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:41, 25 September 2025
Line 109:		Line 109:
	::Different standards of review may be imposed depending on the issue that is under review and the nature of the tribunal. The law relating to standards of review is quite complicated and depends on which tribunal is involved.		::Different standards of review may be imposed depending on the issue that is under review and the nature of the tribunal. The law relating to standards of review is quite complicated and depends on which tribunal is involved.

	::Recently, the Supreme Court of Canada in [https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2019/2019scc65/2019scc65.html%20Canada%20(Minister%20of%20Citizenship%20and%20Immigration ''Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v Vavilov'], 2019 SCC 65 revised the rules for determining the standard of review. Generally, for all decisions, the presumed standard of review will now be '''reasonableness''', unless legislative intent or the rule of law may require a different standard of review. The court stated:		::Recently, the Supreme Court of Canada in ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2019/2019scc65/2019scc65.html%20Canada%20(Minister%20of%20Citizenship%20and%20Immigration Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v Vavilov']'', 2019 SCC 65 revised the rules for determining the standard of review. Generally, for all decisions, the presumed standard of review will now be '''reasonableness''', unless legislative intent or the rule of law may require a different standard of review. The court stated:

	:::"The presumption of reasonableness review can be rebutted in two types of situations. The first is where the legislature has indicated that it intends a different standard or set of standards to apply. This will be the case where the legislature explicitly prescribes the applicable standard of review. It will also be the case where the legislature has provided a statutory appeal mechanism from an administrative decision to a court, thereby signalling the legislature’s intent that appellate standards apply when a court reviews the decision. The second situation in which the presumption of reasonableness review will be rebutted is where the rule of law requires that the standard of correctness be applied. This will be the case for certain categories of questions, namely constitutional questions, general questions of law of central importance to the legal system as a whole and questions related to the jurisdictional boundaries between two or more administrative bodies."		:::"The presumption of reasonableness review can be rebutted in two types of situations. The first is where the legislature has indicated that it intends a different standard or set of standards to apply. This will be the case where the legislature explicitly prescribes the applicable standard of review. It will also be the case where the legislature has provided a statutory appeal mechanism from an administrative decision to a court, thereby signalling the legislature’s intent that appellate standards apply when a court reviews the decision. The second situation in which the presumption of reasonableness review will be rebutted is where the rule of law requires that the standard of correctness be applied. This will be the case for certain categories of questions, namely constitutional questions, general questions of law of central importance to the legal system as a whole and questions related to the jurisdictional boundaries between two or more administrative bodies."

	::If a tribunal is interpreting its own enabling statute or a closely related statute with which it has particular familiarity or expertise (e.g., the Workers’ Compensation Board applying the ''Workers Compensation Act, RSBC 2019, c 1)'', then the court will generally show some deference to the tribunal’s interpretation.		::If a tribunal is interpreting its own enabling statute or a closely related statute with which it has particular familiarity or expertise (e.g., the Workers’ Compensation Board applying the ''Workers Compensation Act'', RSBC 2019, c 1), then the court will generally show some deference to the tribunal’s interpretation.

	::In British Columbia, the ''Administrative Tribunals Act'' sets a different standard of review, '''patently unreasonable''', for Tribunals that are seen as “expert tribunals”. The largest of these tribunals are the Residential Tenancy Branch and the Worker’s Compensation Appeal Tribunal. In practice, there is often little difference between the patently unreasonable standard and a review on the reasonableness standard, as the Supreme Court of Canada noted in ''Dunsmuir'' that it would be illogical and potentially raise rule of law concerns to allow an irrational decision to stand because its irrationality was not “clear” or “obvious” enough.		::In British Columbia, the ''Administrative Tribunals Act'' sets a different standard of review, '''patently unreasonable''', for Tribunals that are seen as “expert tribunals”. The largest of these tribunals are the Residential Tenancy Branch and the Worker’s Compensation Appeal Tribunal. In practice, there is often little difference between the patently unreasonable standard and a review on the reasonableness standard, as the Supreme Court of Canada noted in ''Dunsmuir'' that it would be illogical and potentially raise rule of law concerns to allow an irrational decision to stand because its irrationality was not “clear” or “obvious” enough.

LSLAP: /* c) Remedies of Judicial Review */

2025-09-21T03:27:21Z

c) Remedies of Judicial Review

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:27, 21 September 2025
Line 166:		Line 166:

	Several remedies are available through judicial review:		Several remedies are available through judicial review:
	* an order in the nature of ''mandamus'' that requires a tribunal to exercise certain powers,		# an order in the nature of ''mandamus'' that requires a tribunal to exercise certain powers,
	* an order in the nature of ''prohibition'' that prohibits a tribunal from exercising unlawful authority,		# an order in the nature of ''prohibition'' that prohibits a tribunal from exercising unlawful authority,
	* an order in the nature of ''certiorari'' that quashes a tribunal decision,		# an order in the nature of ''certiorari'' that quashes a tribunal decision,
	* where there is an exercise, refusal to exercise, or a proposed or purported exercise of a statutory power, an injunction or declaration from the court, or		# where there is an exercise, refusal to exercise, or a proposed or purported exercise of a statutory power, an injunction or declaration from the court, or
	* a court-issued declaration to clarify the law.		# a court-issued declaration to clarify the law.

	A party may also challenge a tribunal decision via a civil action for a declaration or injunction. For non-statutory tribunals, this is the only method of challenge. This is also the only method of challenge wherein the court may grant damages.		A party may also challenge a tribunal decision via a civil action for a declaration or injunction. For non-statutory tribunals, this is the only method of challenge. This is also the only method of challenge wherein the court may grant damages.

LSLAP: /* d) Remedies of Judicial Review */

2025-09-21T03:26:45Z

d) Remedies of Judicial Review

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:26, 21 September 2025
Line 163:		Line 163:
	::All decision-makers are expected to act in good faith and not to discriminate on the basis of irrelevant criteria. Parties are entitled to a decision made by persons untainted by the appearance of bias or conflicts of interest. A tribunal has a duty to at least consider exercising any discretion it may have.		::All decision-makers are expected to act in good faith and not to discriminate on the basis of irrelevant criteria. Parties are entitled to a decision made by persons untainted by the appearance of bias or conflicts of interest. A tribunal has a duty to at least consider exercising any discretion it may have.

	===== d) Remedies of Judicial Review =====		===== c) Remedies of Judicial Review =====

	Several remedies are available through judicial review:		Several remedies are available through judicial review:

LSLAP: /* c) Scope of Judicial Review */

2025-09-21T03:26:31Z

c) Scope of Judicial Review

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:26, 21 September 2025
Line 85:		Line 85:
	:David Mossop et al, ''Representing Yourself in a Judicial Review'', 5th ed (Vancouver: Community Legal Assistance Society, 2015), online: [https://judicialreviewbc.ca/].		:David Mossop et al, ''Representing Yourself in a Judicial Review'', 5th ed (Vancouver: Community Legal Assistance Society, 2015), online: [https://judicialreviewbc.ca/].

	==== c) Scope of Judicial Review ====		==== b) Scope of Judicial Review ====

	Assuming a party can resort to the courts to review the decision of a tribunal, there are limitations as to the scope of judicial review.		Assuming a party can resort to the courts to review the decision of a tribunal, there are limitations as to the scope of judicial review.

LSLAP at 20:37, 23 August 2025

2025-08-23T20:37:34Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:37, 23 August 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= ~~July 22~~, ~~2024~~}}		{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= August 23, 2025}}
	{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = complaints}}		{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = complaints}}

LSLAP: /* d) Remedies of Judicial Review */

2025-08-23T19:13:01Z

d) Remedies of Judicial Review

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:13, 23 August 2025
Line 166:		Line 166:

	Several remedies are available through judicial review:		Several remedies are available through judicial review:
	* an order in the nature of ''mandamus'' that requires a tribunal to exercise certain powers;		* an order in the nature of ''mandamus'' that requires a tribunal to exercise certain powers,
	* an order in the nature of ''prohibition'' that prohibits a tribunal from exercising unlawful authority;		* an order in the nature of ''prohibition'' that prohibits a tribunal from exercising unlawful authority,
	* an order in the nature of ''certiorari'' that quashes a tribunal decision;		* an order in the nature of ''certiorari'' that quashes a tribunal decision,
	* where there is an exercise, refusal to exercise, or a proposed or purported exercise of a statutory power, an injunction or declaration from the court; or		* where there is an exercise, refusal to exercise, or a proposed or purported exercise of a statutory power, an injunction or declaration from the court, or
	* a court-issued declaration to clarify the law.		* a court-issued declaration to clarify the law.

	A party may also challenge a tribunal decision via a civil action for a declaration or injunction. For non-statutory tribunals, this is the only method of challenge. This is also the only method of challenge wherein the court may grant damages.		A party may also challenge a tribunal decision via a civil action for a declaration or injunction. For non-statutory tribunals, this is the only method of challenge. This is also the only method of challenge wherein the court may grant damages.

	:'''NOTE:''' Justice Access Centres are now open with locations in Abbotsford, Nanaimo, Surrey, Vancouver and Victoria. The centres can help clients access and fill out the required forms to file for Judicial Review, provide information about legal issues and refer individuals to services and resources that may be helpful. Please contact the centre nearest you for additional support. For more information visit: [http://www.gov.bc.ca/Justice-Access-Centre www.gov.bc.ca/Justice-Access-Centre].

	=== 2. Ombudsperson ===		=== 2. Ombudsperson ===