J.M. Farley

The applicant sought an order of mandamus to compel the Registrar of Motor Vehicles to reinstate his driver's licence following a suspension for impaired driving.

He argued that the six-month follow-up interview required by the Remedial Measures Program was not authorized by law.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding that a purposive interpretation of the Highway Traffic Act and its regulations authorized the three-component program, including the follow-up interview.

Furthermore, the application was moot as the applicant's licence had expired and been suspended for other infractions.

The applicant association sought judicial review of a decision by the Canadian Milk Supply Management Committee refusing to expand a special milk class permit program to include cheese used in fresh pizzas.

The applicant argued the decision was administrative and breached procedural fairness.

The Divisional Court held it had jurisdiction to hear the application but dismissed it on the merits.

The court found the Committee's decision was legislative and policy-oriented, not administrative, and therefore did not attract a duty of procedural fairness.

The court concluded the applicant was given sufficient opportunity to make its views known and no breach of fairness occurred.

The plaintiff sought costs of an appeal to the Divisional Court on a substantial indemnity basis.

The Attorney General conceded the plaintiff was entitled to costs but argued they should be on a partial indemnity basis.

The court agreed with the Attorney General, noting that substantial indemnity costs require egregious or vexatious conduct.

The court also disallowed costs for the attendance of two of the plaintiff's counsel who had acted as affiants and were requested to withdraw from the hearing.

Costs were fixed at $13,145 plus disbursements and GST on a partial indemnity basis.