Megan Beal

The employer sought judicial review of an arbitrator's decision to substitute a 30-day suspension for the dismissal of a flight attendant who had unlatched refreshment trolleys during a flight.

The employer argued the arbitrator's reasoning was illogical and failed to address safety concerns.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding the arbitrator's decision was reasonable, justified, and transparent under the Vavilov standard, as the arbitrator reasonably concluded the misconduct was not as grave as the employer believed and lacked malice.

The applicant employer sought judicial review of a grievance arbitration award that substituted a thirty-day suspension for the termination of an employee.

The Divisional Court stayed the application as premature, noting that the arbitrator had remitted the matter back to the parties and remained seized of the issue of whether reinstatement was an appropriate remedy.

The court held that judicial review should wait until the final disposition of the remedy to avoid overlapping work and inconsistent decisions.

The applicant hospital sought judicial review of an arbitration award between a food services contractor and a union, arguing it was denied natural justice because it was not given notice of the hearing.

The arbitrator had found the contractor violated the collective agreement by contracting out patient food services to the hospital.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, holding that the hospital's interest in the arbitration was commercial and indirect, rather than a direct legal interest that would entitle it to third-party standing and notice.