1. Be careful what you ask for…

“Maybe it’s opposite day! Maybe all these X’s mean that my answers are correct! Maybe your “A” is really an “F”! That must be it! I win the bet!”

– Calvin, Calvin & Hobbes

To me, the suggestion that the topic of the Standard of Review is the great Canadian passion, at least for practitioners of administrative law, is firmly tongue in cheek. While I have acknowledged that the standard of review is at the heart of judicial review, there is so much more to administrative law. I would suggest that . . . [more]

Forget the business attire, forget the hearing room, and forget regular business hours. The future may even be dispute resolution in your pyjamas. Necessity being the mother of invention, an increasing need for better access to justice and the means for delivering it means that your home computer, laptop, or mobile device can serve as the place where disputes are resolved.

In Cooper v. Canada (Human Rights Commission), [1996] 3 SCR 854 at para. 10, Lamer CJ noted that the rise of the administrative state has been marked by the creation of institutions other than the courts. While Lamer . . . [more]

One of the predominant topics in any discussion about administrative law is standard of review. The standard of review is at the heart of judicial review proceedings. What I find much more interesting is standard of proof. The vast majority of administrative law decisions never go to judicial review, or even to an administrative appeal tribunal. The decision at first instance is often the final decision. From that perspective, the standard of proof is a far more important concept.

Statutory Standards of Proof

For administrative tribunals, the default is the civil standard of proof on the balance of probabilities, subject . . . [more]