Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Federal Court dismissed Monica Loughlin’s judicial review, finding she challenged the Registrar’s decision rather than the Commissioner’s and had no basis for intervention.
The Board reasonably concluded it lacked jurisdiction because assignment to detector dog handling duties did not constitute an appointment under the PSEA given the job description and Call Letter of Interest, and because this conclusion was consistent with binding authority (Smith); accordingly dismissal on a motion to dismiss was appropriate and no breach of procedural fairness occurred because the Board was statutorily authorized to decide without an oral hearing and the applicant had a meaningful opportunity to respond.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court of Appeal held the Board's Decision was reasonable: the Board had considered relevant factors (service record and medical evidence), reasonably concluded that progressive discipline had failed to correct misconduct, and therefore termination was justified; the application for judicial review was dismissed.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court of Appeal held the Board's arbitral award was reasonable: the Board conducted a coherent, rational analysis grounded in the record, properly applied the statutory factors and comparability analysis, did not commit a serious reviewable error, and therefore its rejection of the $2,500 lump sum for Senate employees is upheld and the judicial review application is dismissed with costs.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court reasonably concluded that the grievance decision — that the impugned conduct did not meet the Treasury Board definition of workplace harassment — was within the range of reasonable outcomes; any procedural deficiencies were technical and inconsequential and did not require remand; accordingly the appeal is dismissed.
Source excerpt
The adjudicator’s decision was reasonable: he applied the proper test for sham/bad faith probationary dismissals, grounded his finding of bad faith in the totality of the evidence (lack of mentoring/training, an unreasonably brief improvement period, and the decision-maker’s lack of knowledge), did not impermissibly shift the burden of proof, and any reliance on demeanour was ancillary to multiple other, credible factual findings; the Federal Court of Appeal therefore dismissed the judicial review application with costs.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court struck McCarthy’s judicial review as premature because the dispute was grievable under the FPSLRA and the grievance process had to be exhausted first.
Judicial review of a grievance decision about the effective date of a promotion was dismissed. The Court found the process fair and the reasons reasonable.
The Court allowed judicial review, finding the Board’s decision unreasonable because it failed to determine whether the suspension without pay was supported by just cause and produced a contradictory outcome by upholding termination while finding the suspension unjustified; the Court held that the facts supporting dismissal existed at the time of the suspension and that s.12(3) FAA does not impose an additional requirement that reasons be communicated before a disciplinary measure may take effect, set aside the Board’s order to reimburse wages for July 10–October 27, 2015, and dismissed the g…
Source excerpt
Judicial review of a CRA grievance decision was allowed because the Assistant Commissioner gave insufficient, unintelligible reasons and failed to assess the full harassment record.
Explore more
