Shannon Reid

The respondents moved to convert an oppression application into an action and consolidate it with three wrongful dismissal actions brought by the applicants.

The respondents argued that the dispute involved complex factual and credibility issues that required oral discovery and a trial.

The court dismissed the motion as premature, finding that the respondents had not yet delivered responding evidence and had failed to clearly identify credibility issues that could not be resolved on a paper record.

The court held that the application judge would be in a better position to determine whether a trial is necessary after the evidentiary record is fully developed.

The applicant career college sought judicial review of a decision by Accreditation Canada to revoke the accreditation of its Diagnostic Medical Sonography Program, and the Superintendent's subsequent decision to revoke the program's approval.

Accreditation Canada brought a motion to stay the judicial review proceedings under s. 7(1) of the Arbitration Act, relying on an arbitration clause in the accreditation contract.

The Divisional Court found that while the accreditation decision was an exercise of statutory authority with sufficient public character to be subject to judicial review, the technical requirements for a mandatory stay in favour of arbitration were met.

The court held that the arbitration agreement was not unconscionable and that the subject matter was capable of being arbitrated.

The motion to stay the judicial review was granted.

The applicant career college brought a motion for a stay of the Superintendent's decision to revoke approval of its diagnostic medical sonography program pending a judicial review application.

The revocation followed the loss of the program's accreditation status.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion, finding that the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence of irreparable harm, such as financial inability to pay required student refunds.

Furthermore, the balance of convenience favoured denying the stay to allow students to receive refunds and pursue education elsewhere, rather than remaining trapped in an unaccredited program.

The Court of Appeal for Ontario allowed the appeal of the Attorney General of Canada, setting aside the conditional certification of a class action brought by Andrew Knisley, a veteran, regarding the administration of disability benefits by Veterans Affairs Canada.

The court found that conditional certification is not permitted under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992, and remitted the matter for reconsideration of whether an identifiable class exists.

The court also upheld the motion judge’s finding that the claim in negligence disclosed a reasonable cause of action.

The appellants appealed a trial judgment dismissing their action against the Township of Wainfleet for the destruction of a diseased apple orchard under the Weed Control Act.

They sought damages for negligence, misfeasance, trespass, and nuisance, and declarations that the Township's bylaw was passed in bad faith, not in the public interest, improperly targeted them, and was ultra vires.

The Court of Appeal found no error in the trial judge's conclusions that the bylaw was valid, the Township followed proper procedures including public notice, and the appellants were not targeted.

The appeal was dismissed.