The appellant utility company was regulated by the respondent Board.
Prior to and during a hearing regarding the appellant's executive compensation, a board member made strong public statements indicating he felt the compensation was unjustified and should not be borne by ratepayers.
The appellant objected to the member's participation, but the Board proceeded.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that the member's statements raised a reasonable apprehension of bias and indicated a closed mind.
The Court concluded that a decision made in circumstances where a reasonable apprehension of bias exists is void ab initio, not merely voidable, as it constitutes a denial of the right to a fair hearing.
