Kealey

Following a successful application for judicial review that prohibited the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal from hearing a complaint, the applicant sought substantial indemnity costs against the Commission and the Tribunal for both the judicial review and the underlying human rights proceedings.

The Divisional Court held it lacked jurisdiction under the Human Rights Code or the Courts of Justice Act to award costs for the tribunal proceedings.

For the judicial review, the court awarded partial indemnity costs of $20,563.57 against the Commission alone, finding the hours claimed by the applicant excessive and declining to award costs against the Tribunal as it had not engaged in misconduct or taken an adversarial position on the merits.

The applicant employer sought judicial review of a labour arbitrator's interim award ordering it to make ex gratia payments to a grieving employee whose sick leave benefits had been terminated.

The Divisional Court held that while the arbitrator's interpretation of the Labour Relations Act as granting jurisdiction for the interim award was unreasonable, his alternative reliance on the collective agreement was not patently unreasonable.

The interim award was upheld and the application for judicial review was largely dismissed.

The applicant applied for an enhanced A-Z driver's licence and submitted a medical report that was equivocal regarding his alcohol use.

The Registrar demanded further medical information, which the applicant refused to provide, resulting in the suspension of his existing 'G' licence.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding that the Registrar's requirement for additional information and subsequent licence suspension were not unreasonable.

The applicant employer sought judicial review of an Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB) decision finding it bound by a provincial collective agreement with the respondent union.

The OLRB had determined that a 1998 memorandum of agreement signed by the employer ratified earlier agreements and waived any right to challenge their validity.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, holding that the OLRB's determination of union representation rights fell within its specialized jurisdiction and was protected by privative clauses.

Applying the patently unreasonable standard of review, the court found no basis to interfere with the OLRB's decision.

The tenants appealed an eviction order issued by the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal after the male tenant verbally assaulted and threatened the building superintendents while intoxicated.

The tenants argued the Tribunal erred by admitting an unsworn statement from a witness who was not summoned to the hearing.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no defect in the notice of termination and holding that the unsworn statement was admissible at the Tribunal's discretion under the Statutory Powers Procedure Act and the Tenant Protection Act.

The Ontario College of Teachers appealed a penalty decision of its Discipline Committee regarding a teacher found guilty of professional misconduct.

The Committee had imposed a one-year suspension, with seven months running concurrently with a prior employer suspension, and the remaining five months suspended on conditions.

The Divisional Court applied the reasonableness standard of review, finding that the Committee's decision not to revoke the teacher's certificate was reasonable.

The Court dismissed the appeal but varied the wording of the penalty to clarify the five-month conditional suspension.

Costs of $7,500 were awarded to the respondent teacher.

The appellant appealed an order varying a permanent custody order.

The Divisional Court allowed the appeal and set aside the variation order, adopting the reasons of the judge who granted leave to appeal.

The court noted that the original custody order was made after a full hearing with full reasons, and the concerns expressed in Sypher v. Sypher did not apply.