Ontario Civil

Administrative Law

Decision for disbursement of public funds within sole authority of legislature

Applicant sought judicial review of respondent’s decision denying application to second career program. Application was denied on basis that skills training program requested must lead to one of occupations listed in guidelines and that did not include education program applicant intended to pursue. Application sought judicial review on urgent basis because program was to start in September 2013. Application dismissed. Applicant failed to establish that delay required for application to Divisional Court was likely to involve failure of justice. Application was without merit. Respondent’s decision was not reviewable and was reasonable. Decision of respondent to define who was eligible for program was not decision that was subject to judicial review because it was decision for disbursement of public funds and was within sole authority of legislature. Criteria for program was reasonable and applicant did not meet requirements.

Kuki v. Ontario (Ministry of Training, Colleges, and Universities) (Sep. 3, 2013, Ont. S.C.J., Patrick Smith J., File No. 13-1946) 232 A.C.W.S. (3d) 285.

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Law Times reports that there is no explicit rule that lawyers in Ontario must be competent in the use of technology. Do you think there should be explicit rules spelling out the expectations of lawyers’ in terms of tech use in their practice?