Court File and Parties

CITATION: Netsoft College of Technology v. Ministry of Colleges and Universities, 2025 ONSC 4776

DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 627/24

DATE: 20250820

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO DIVISIONAL COURT

RE: Netsoft College of Technology, Applicant AND: Her Majesty the King in the right of Ontario as represented by the ministry of colleges and universities, Respondent

BEFORE: McWatt, ACJ, Molloy and Sachs JJ.

COUNSEL: Kenneth E. Wise, for Applicant Matthew Chung and Michael Sims, for the Respondent

HEARD at Toronto: August 18, 2025

Endorsement

Sachs, J. (Orally)

[1] This is a judicial review of the Ministry of College and Universities’ (the “Ministry”) determination that Netsoft College of Technology (“Netsoft”) owes a refund to three students who received instruction from an instructor who lacked the requisite qualifications to give instruction under the Private Career Colleges Act.

[2] There were a number of issues raised in this application, including the issues of whether the Ministry had made a decision that could be the subject of judicial review and whether Netsoft had standing to bring the application. There is no need to determine these preliminary issues as it is clear that the application has no merit.

[3] As Netsoft made clear in its oral submissions the essence of their complaint is the fact that when the Ministry chose to conduct an internal review of the first determination that formed the basis for the finding that a refund was owed – namely, the fact that the instructor in question lacked the requisite qualifications - the people who conducted that review refused to look at the material filed by Netsoft that clearly established that the instructor did have the necessary qualifications. According to Netsoft, while this material was not before the inspector who made the initial determination, it was filed with the Ministry in August of 2023, approximately 10 months before the internal reviewers made their decision on June 12, 2024.

[4] The problem with Netsoft’s position is that the material in question was filed with the Ministry on July 11, 2024, which was after the internal reviewers had made their decision. When this became clear during the Ministry’s oral submissions, Netsoft took the position in reply that the Ministry should have exercised its discretion to reconsider the matter for a second time. The Ministry refused to do so, relying on the fact that the principle of finality is an important aspect of the orderly administration of justice.

[5] In our view, this finding on the part of the Ministry was a reasonable one and did not involve a breach of procedural fairness. Thus, even if Netsoft has standing to bring a judicial review application, the application cannot succeed.

[6] For these reasons the application is dismissed. In accordance with the agreement of the parties, Netsoft shall pay the Ministry its costs of the application, fixed in the amount of $6250.00, all inclusive.

Sachs J.

I agree _______________________________

McWatt ACJ.

I agree _______________________________

Molloy J.

Date: August 20, 2025