The respondent appealed a refusal for reimbursement of medical equipment to the Commission des affaires sociales.
Two commissioners heard the appeal and drafted a favourable decision, but the Commission's president reviewed it and disagreed.
A compulsory plenary meeting was held, leading one commissioner to change her mind, and the president then decided the matter against the respondent.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that the Commission's institutionalized consultation process violated the rules of natural justice by creating systemic pressure and an appearance of bias, and dismissed the Commission's appeal.
