Difference between revisions of "Introduction to Public Complaints (5:I)"

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
Line 114: Line 114:
Findings of fact are generally reviewable only if they are not supported on the evidence. The deference granted by the court to a tribunal’s  findings of fact in judicial review is akin to the deference an appeal court shows to a trial court’s findings of fact. Nevertheless, the  legislature is presumed not to have intended to give an administrative body the authority to act arbitrarily or capriciously. If the tribunal makes a finding of fact that cannot reasonably be drawn from the evidence, then it is exceeding the authority granted to it, and its decision can be set aside by the court.  
Findings of fact are generally reviewable only if they are not supported on the evidence. The deference granted by the court to a tribunal’s  findings of fact in judicial review is akin to the deference an appeal court shows to a trial court’s findings of fact. Nevertheless, the  legislature is presumed not to have intended to give an administrative body the authority to act arbitrarily or capriciously. If the tribunal makes a finding of fact that cannot reasonably be drawn from the evidence, then it is exceeding the authority granted to it, and its decision can be set aside by the court.  


(b)Errors of Law Substantive law reviewable by the courts can be divided into two areas: statutory interpretation related to the powers of a tribunal, and interpretation related to other broader questions of law. A tribunal can be overruled if it is acting without authority. A tribunal   must  generally   act   within   the   jurisdiction   of   the legislation   that   created   it.   Similarly,   a   tribunal   must   not misinterpret the rules that govern  the way it exercises authority, since these rules represent a precondition to the exercise of that authority. The mandate of a tribunal is  defined in large part by the intention of the legislature. If in the course of exercising its authority a tribunal misinterprets its mandate,  a court maydeclare the tribunal’ s decision void upon judicial review. Similarly, a tribunal can be overruled  if  it  applies  the  law incorrectly  in  other  contexts.  The  enabling  statute  creating  a given  tribunal  cannot  grant  it  the  authority  to  act  illegally  or  to change the law. (c)Standards of Review 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;  thus,  for  a more detailed discussion of the issues pertaining to the standards of  review,  one  should  refer  to Dunsmuir, above.  See  also  the ATA for statutorily prescribed standards of review applicable to certain provincial tribunals. Generally,  for  questions  of  law  that  go  beyond  the  tribunal’ s specialized  area  of  expertise,  the  standard  of  review  will  be correctness— i.e., the tribunal must get the law right.  
====== (b) Errors of Law ======
 
Substantive law reviewable by the courts can be divided into two areas: statutory interpretation related to the powers of a tribunal, and interpretation related to other broader questions of law. A tribunal can be overruled if it is acting without authority. A tribunal must  generally act within the jurisdiction of the legislation that created it. Similarly, a tribunal must not misinterpret the rules that govern  the way it exercises authority, since these rules represent a precondition to the exercise of that authority. The mandate of a tribunal is  defined in large part by the intention of the legislature. If in the course of exercising its authority a tribunal misinterprets its mandate,  a court may declare the tribunal’s decision void upon judicial review. Similarly, a tribunal can be overruled  if  it  applies  the  law incorrectly  in  other  contexts.  The  enabling  statute  creating  a given  tribunal  cannot  grant  it  the  authority  to  act  illegally  or  to change the law. (c)Standards of Review 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;  thus,  for  a more detailed discussion of the issues pertaining to the standards of  review,  one  should  refer  to Dunsmuir, above.  See  also  the ATA for statutorily prescribed standards of review applicable to certain provincial tribunals. Generally,  for  questions  of  law  that  go  beyond  the  tribunal’ s specialized  area  of  expertise,  the  standard  of  review  will  be correctness— i.e., the tribunal must get the law right.  




next p5-6
next p5-6

Navigation menu