Hiebert v. Price

Hiebert v. Price

Delegation of authority to the Assistant Commissioner (Respondent Price) to decide third-level grievances was valid; the denial of the Applicant's transfer on safety and incompatibility grounds was a discretionary, reasonable decision supported by the record and did not breach procedural fairness or s.7 Charter...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2004 FC 1531
Parties
Applicant: Kurt Alexander Hiebert; Respondent (acting/assistant Commissioner): Joe Price; Respondent (commissioner of Corrections): Ole Ingstrup
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 October 2004
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Federal Court Decision on Application for Certiorari and Mandamus
Outcome
Application for judicial review dismissed
Legal Topics
Delegation of Authority, Procedural Fairness, Inmate Transfer, Incompatibles Classification, Judicial Review, Mandamus, Confidentiality
Source Language
english
Administrative Law Correctional Law Constitutional Law Delegation of Authority Procedural Fairness Inmate Transfer Incompatibles Classification Judicial Review +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kurt Alexander Hiebert

Applicant

Joe Price

Respondent (acting/assistant Commissioner)

Ole Ingstrup

Respondent (commissioner of Corrections)

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Federal Court Decision on Application for Certiorari and Mandamus

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commissioner validly delegated authority to decide third-level grievances
  2. 2 Whether the decision-maker breached procedural fairness in denying transfer
  3. 3 Whether the Commissioner failed to discharge statutory duties under ss.28 and 31(2) of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act

Ratio Decidendi

Delegation of authority to the Assistant Commissioner (Respondent Price) to decide third-level grievances was valid; the denial of the Applicant's transfer on safety and incompatibility grounds was a discretionary, reasonable decision supported by the record and did not breach procedural fairness or s.7 Charter rights; the Commissioner did not fail to discharge duties under ss.28 or 31(2); judicial review application dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review dismissed

Orders

  • Application for judicial review dismissed with costs of $500.00 inclusive of GST and disbursements
  • Orders sought in the nature of certiorari and mandamus are refused