4 total
Judicial review dismissed; arbitrator reasonably concluded pension contribution dispute was outside collective agreement jurisdiction.
The applicant union sought judicial review of a labour arbitration award which found the arbitrator lacked jurisdiction to hear grievances regarding the hospital's pension contribution deductions.
The arbitrator had concluded that the dispute fell within the exclusive jurisdiction of the pension plan administrator, not the collective agreement.
The Divisional Court applied the reasonableness standard of review and found the arbitrator's decision was justified, transparent, and intelligible, noting the arbitrator properly considered the collective agreement, agreed facts, and relevant jurisprudence including the Weber essential character test.
The application for judicial review was dismissed.
Superannuation account surpluses were accounting entries, not member-owned assets.
This appeal considered whether actuarial surpluses recorded in federal public-sector superannuation accounts were assets in which plan members held legal or equitable interests.
The Court held the accounts were statutory accounting records tracking Consolidated Revenue Fund transactions, not segregated asset pools.
It rejected claims based on proprietary entitlement, fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, constructive trust, and alleged expropriation.
The Court further held the statutory amendments authorized debiting surplus amounts and did not require compensation.
The appeal was dismissed with costs.
Court sanctioned consolidated insolvency proposal and approved third-party release provisions.
On an unopposed insolvency motion under Part III of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, the moving parties sought sanction of an amended consolidated proposal with substantive consolidation and a broad third-party release.
The court applied the section 59(2) reasonableness-and-benefit test, considered good faith and creditor voting support, and accepted that the proposal met statutory requirements.
The court held that third-party releases were permissible in the circumstances and interpreted the statute harmoniously with restructuring principles applied under related insolvency legislation.
Applying the Metcalfe criteria, the court found the release was necessary, supported by tangible contributions, and beneficial to creditors generally compared with bankruptcy alternatives.
The sanction order was granted.
Costs of the appeal fixed at $100,000 payable to the respondent on consent.
The parties consented to an order fixing the costs of the appeal at $100,000, all inclusive, payable to the respondent Crown.