Close Review of Credibility Findings
Under the new standard of review of tribunal decisions, findings of fact are reviewed on the basis of whether there was a palpable and overriding
Bernie LeBlanc
June 2, 2020
Under the new standard of review of tribunal decisions, findings of fact are reviewed on the basis of whether there was a palpable and overriding
Tribunal members are given some leeway to question witnesses. Questions clarifying the evidence of a witness or even asking for additional explanation on a point
There are some cases in which many issues are raised and dealt with. Multiple points of learning on a diversity of topics can arise. Houghton
A recent decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal has provided additional guidance about making findings on credibility. In R. v Esquivel-Benitez, 2020 ONCA 160,
How should a regulator respond to a practitioner making repeated public accusations that it is acting with dishonesty and bad faith and was abusing its
The Supreme Court of Canada made an important decision changing the way courts will review the actions or decisions of administrative bodies, including regulators of
The Ontario Court of Appeal has rejected the proposition that courts should closely scrutinize the general transparency, accountability and adequacy of funding of delegated regulators:
In the high profile case of Howe v Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society, 2019 NSCA 81, http://canlii.ca/t/j3085 a lawyer was found at discipline to have “been
Procedural missteps by a regulator can often be cured. In Volochay v College of Massage Therapist, 2019 ONSC 5718, http://canlii.ca/t/j2np8, serious allegations of sexual abuse
When a tribunal makes an erroneous factual finding a court will review the significance of the error in determining whether to set aside the decision.
To subscribe to Regulation Pro Blog, please enter your e-mail address below.