Federal appeal | Administrative Law
Discretion of tribunal under review
General principles
Tribunal used improper section of law to dismiss procedural fairness complaint
Appellant T was complainant to public service tribunal, claiming she had been subject to reprisal from respondent employer Crown. Tribunal determined that they had no authority to deal with complaint. T claimed that standards of review used were improper. T also claimed that her procedural fairness rights were violated, as applicable section of law was not used by tribunal. T applied for judicial review of tribunal decision. Application was dismissed. T appealed from dismissal of application. Appeal allowed. Tribunal used improper section of law to dismiss procedural fairness complaint. Commissioner of tribunal did not disclose that this section was being considered to dismiss complaint. T was misinformed, and could not have known case she had to meet. Matter was referred back to tribunal, to be determined in accordance with reasons of reviewing court.
Therrien v. Canada (Attorney General) (2017), 2017 CarswellNat 61, 2017 FCA 14, Scott J.A., Boivin J.A., and Mary J.L. Gleason J.A. (F.C.A.); reversed (2015), 2015 CarswellNat 10847, 2015 CarswellNat 7151, 2015 FC 1351, 2015 CF 1351, B. Richard Bell J. (F.C.).
General principles
Tribunal used improper section of law to dismiss procedural fairness complaint
Appellant T was complainant to public service tribunal, claiming she had been subject to reprisal from respondent employer Crown. Tribunal determined that they had no authority to deal with complaint. T claimed that standards of review used were improper. T also claimed that her procedural fairness rights were violated, as applicable section of law was not used by tribunal. T applied for judicial review of tribunal decision. Application was dismissed. T appealed from dismissal of application. Appeal allowed. Tribunal used improper section of law to dismiss procedural fairness complaint. Commissioner of tribunal did not disclose that this section was being considered to dismiss complaint. T was misinformed, and could not have known case she had to meet. Matter was referred back to tribunal, to be determined in accordance with reasons of reviewing court.
Therrien v. Canada (Attorney General) (2017), 2017 CarswellNat 61, 2017 FCA 14, Scott J.A., Boivin J.A., and Mary J.L. Gleason J.A. (F.C.A.); reversed (2015), 2015 CarswellNat 10847, 2015 CarswellNat 7151, 2015 FC 1351, 2015 CF 1351, B. Richard Bell J. (F.C.).
