5,109
edits
Difference between revisions of "Review of Administrative Decisions for Public Complaints (5:III)"
From Clicklaw Wikibooks
Review of Administrative Decisions for Public Complaints (5:III) (view source)
Revision as of 23:17, 22 August 2022
, 23:17, 22 August 2022→(c) Standards of Review
| Line 127: | Line 127: | ||
The BCCA decision in [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2021/2021bcca428/2021bcca428.html?autocompleteStr=lululemon%20athletica%20canada%20inc.%20v.%20Industrial%20Color%20Productions%20Inc.%2C%202021%20BCCA%20428&autocompletePos=1 ''lululemon athletica canada inc. v. Industrial Color Productions Inc.''] 2021 BCCA 428 on November 12th, 2021 held that despite ''Vavilov'', [https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/2011/2011onca622/2011onca622.html ''Mexico v. Cargill, Incorporated''] 2011 ONCA 622 remains the leading case on issues of standard of review for commercial arbitration. Justice Marchand elaborates on the applicability of ''Vavilov'' in this case, stating that it is not helpful as it concerns the applicable standard of review as it applies in administrative law and not commercial arbitration. The BCCA held that ''Cargill'' is not undermined by the ''Vavilov'' in this context, and that the appropriate standard of review in this case is correctness. | The BCCA decision in [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2021/2021bcca428/2021bcca428.html?autocompleteStr=lululemon%20athletica%20canada%20inc.%20v.%20Industrial%20Color%20Productions%20Inc.%2C%202021%20BCCA%20428&autocompletePos=1 ''lululemon athletica canada inc. v. Industrial Color Productions Inc.''] 2021 BCCA 428 on November 12th, 2021 held that despite ''Vavilov'', [https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/2011/2011onca622/2011onca622.html ''Mexico v. Cargill, Incorporated''] 2011 ONCA 622 remains the leading case on issues of standard of review for commercial arbitration. Justice Marchand elaborates on the applicability of ''Vavilov'' in this case, stating that it is not helpful as it concerns the applicable standard of review as it applies in administrative law and not commercial arbitration. The BCCA held that ''Cargill'' is not undermined by the ''Vavilov'' in this context, and that the appropriate standard of review in this case is correctness. | ||
Therefore, recent decisions by the BCCA seem to suggest that the standard of reasonableness from Vavilov and the standard of patent reasonableness from the Administrative Tribunals Act are separate. The standard that applies on judicial review varies, and is dependent upon the tribunal, area of law | Therefore, recent decisions by the BCCA seem to suggest that the standard of reasonableness from Vavilov and the standard of patent reasonableness from the Administrative Tribunals Act are separate. The standard that applies on judicial review varies, and is dependent upon the tribunal, area of law and issues involved. | ||
===== Procedural Fairness ===== | ===== Procedural Fairness ===== | ||
