Canada (Minister of Human Resources Development) v. Wade

Canada (Minister of Human Resources Development) v. Wade

The Federal Court of Appeal held that although the Board stretched its discretion to its permissible maximum, it did not act in a patently unreasonable manner; therefore the application for judicial review was dismissed with costs.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2001 FCA 286
Parties
Applicant: The Minister of Human Resources Development; Respondent: Shannon J. Wade
Court
Federal Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 September 2001
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Decision (judgment)
Outcome
Application for judicial review dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Standard of Review, Discretion Under S.84(2) Canada Pension Plan, New Hearing, Patently Unreasonable
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Social Security/pensions Judicial Review Standard of Review Discretion Under S.84(2) Canada Pension Plan New Hearing Patently Unreasonable

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Minister of Human Resources Development

Applicant

Shannon J. Wade

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Decision (judgment)

  1. 1 Whether the Pension Appeals Board's exercise of discretion under s.84(2) Canada Pension Plan to order a new hearing was patently unreasonable
  2. 2 Whether judicial review should be granted to set aside the Board's decision

Ratio Decidendi

The Federal Court of Appeal held that although the Board stretched its discretion to its permissible maximum, it did not act in a patently unreasonable manner; therefore the application for judicial review was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Application for judicial review dismissed with costs.