Rarotonga, 2010

Simon's Megalomaniacal Legal Resources

(Ontario/Canada)

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW | SPPA / Fairness (Administrative)
SMALL CLAIMS / CIVIL LITIGATION / CIVIL APPEALS / JUDICIAL REVIEW / Practice Directives / Civil Portals

Home / About / Democracy, Law and Duty / Testimonials / Conditions of Use

Civil and Administrative
Litigation Opinions
for Self-Reppers

Simon's Favourite Charity -
Little Friends Lefkada (Greece)
Cat and Dog Rescue


TOPICS


Judicial Review - SOR - Legal Issues

. Prince Edward Island Potato Board v. Canada (Agriculture and Agri-Food)

In Prince Edward Island Potato Board v. Canada (Agriculture and Agri-Food) (Fed CA, 2024) the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from an earlier dismissed JR, here against "an [SS: Ministerial] Order issued by the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food [Minister] under section 15(3) of the Plant Protection Act, SC 1990, c 22, declaring the entire province of Prince Edward Island [PEI] as "“a place infested with potato wart”" and prohibiting the movement of PEI seed potatoes from PEI without written authorization from an inspector [Ministerial Order]".

Here the court [Stratas JA concurring], in considering it's application of the JR SOR of 'reasonableness' wrt legal issues, states a stark - but consistent - conclusion:
[62] This Court must decide whether the Ministerial Order was reasonable by examining it in light of the relevant constellation of law and facts which act as constraints on the Minister: 1120732 B.C. Ltd. v. Whistler (Resort Municipality), 2020 BCCA 101, 445 D.L.R. (4th) 448 at paras. 51, 84 [Whistler], citing Vavilov at paras 105, 138. However, in doing so, this Court must refrain from embarking on its own interpretation of the relevant statutory or regulatory provisions, a task reserved for the Minister. [SS: my italics]
. 2813127 Ontario Inc. v. His Majesty the King

In 2813127 Ontario Inc. v. His Majesty the King (Div Court, 2023) the Divisional Court directly addressed an issue that I have found elusive of attention, that of the standard of review of a purely legal (here, statutory) issue under the JR 'reasonableness' standard from Vavilov:
[15] The court charged with a reasonableness review must defer to any reasonable interpretation of the legislation, even if other reasonable interpretations may exist. Judicial deference in such instances is itself a principle of modern statutory interpretation. (McLean v. British Columbia, 2013 SCC 67 at para 40; Vavilov, at para. 235.)
The result is apparently that 'reasonableness' is one over-riding standard for all of: legal issues, issues of mixed fact and law, and issues of fact.



CC0

The author has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this Isthatlegal.ca webpage.




Last modified: 10-11-24
By: admin