FACULTY OF LAW LAW 372/509 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW. Section 003. Professor Salter TOTAL MARKS: 100

Transcription

1 FACULTY OF LAW THIS EXAMINATION CONSISTS OF 5 PAGES THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA PLEASE ENSURE THAT YOU HAVE A COMPLETE PAPER end of the exam before you leave the classroom. Return this exam question paper to your invigilator at the THIS EXAMINATION CONSISTS OF 4 QUESTIONS is missing and state how it would affect your answer. you consider necessary to answer a question, identify what legislation. If you are missing any information/legislation that 3. Some questions reference abbreviated or fictional up to you. There is no reading time provided. Suggested times are provided. However, time allocation is in the margin and you should allocate your time accordingly. two parts. You are to answer ALL questions and subquestions. The mark for each question and sub-question is 2. This examination consists of 4 questions. Question 4 has notes. Tribunals Act, the Constitutional Questions Act, and your slides, and other class handouts, the Administrative course outline and copies of any cases listed therein, class permitted in the examination: class references (excerpts), NOTE: 1. This is an open book examination. Only the following are ******************* TIME ALLOWED: 3 HOURS TOTAL MARKS: 100 Professor Salter Section 003 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LAW 372/509 FINAL EXAMINATION December 2016 Page 1 of 5 Write Your Exam Code Here:

2 denied her application for disability benefits, under the (65 minutes) right foot was injured. The federal Veterans Department has 35 MARKS Neesha is a veteran of the war in Afghanistan, where her QUESTION 1 - FACTS LAW 372/509, Section 3 Board or the Appeal Panel. The Administrative Tribunals Act does not apply to the law, and it cannot address procedural fairness issues. but it can only change a Board decision if there is an error of There is another level of appeal, called an Appeal Panel, budget. Veterans Department is under pressure to reduce the number of successful disability claims to help it balance its states that they aren t surprised at the result, given that the Neesha talks to a friend about the decision, and the friend denying Neesha s request for disability benefits. The military doctor s report isn t mentioned in the Board s decision. military doctor s report, the Board issues its decision, Several months later, but before Neesha receives the the military doctor on the report. The Board members deny Neesha s position, there is no need for cross-examination. before they make their decision. Neesha s lawyer objects, this request, stating that because the report doesn t hurt returning to her job. Neesha doesn t have a copy of this report, and the Board members promise to send it to her conclude whether Neesha s injury will prevent her from and asks for an adjournment to be able to cross-examine file by a military doctor, which states that it s difficult to At the hearing, the Board members also mention a report on foot in person, maybe they could arrange something. of the hearing Neesha still thinks it s necessary to see her ahead with the telephone hearing, noting that there are making their decision. The Board members decide to go At the hearing, Neesha s lawyer objects to the lack of an inperson oral hearing, on the basis that actually seeing photos of Neesha s foot on file, but mention that if at the end Neesha s foot will be important for the Board members in Board members presiding. hold an oral hearing by telephone conference, with three statute to choose the method of hearing, and it decides to (the Board ). The Board is permitted under its enabling Neesha appeals this decision to the Veterans Review Board to her desk job, despite her injury. Veterans Act, on the basis that she is capable of returning Page 2 of 5

3 any other issues she should be aware of in her case. she wants to know if there are procedural fairness or has advice on the applicable standard of review, and does not need your opinion on this issue. However, Question 1 Neesha comes to see you at a free legal advice clinic, and is no longer represented by a lawyer. She already management on the terms and conditions it considers substitute its own decision for that of a board of determined in an appeal under this section and to make any order permitted to be made. A decision or order of the questions of fact, law and discretion arising or required to be management may determine which doctors are able to review. Neesha s prospects for success, if any, on judicial Discuss these issues, as well as their impact on Page 3 of 5 QUESTION 2 FACTS 25 MARKS The Hospital Act (the Act ) sets out a framework for (45 minutes) hospital administration, including providing that hospital practice at a particular hospital. Doctors who disagree with a hospital s decision in this regard can appeal to the Hospital Appeal Board (the Board ). The Act contains the following provisions: The Hospital Appeal Board has exclusive jurisdiction to inquire into, hear and determine all those matters and Hospital Appeal Board under this Act on a matter in respect of which the Hospital Appeal Board has exclusive jurisdiction is final and conclusive and is not open to question or review in any court. The Hospital Appeal Board may affirm, vary, reverse or appropriate. Dr. Jonas is a general surgeon practicing in the interior of BC, primarily serving an Aboriginal community, of which he is a member. He applied to the Interior Hospital to practice at the hospital, including performing surgeries. He argued that there were no Aboriginal surgeons currently practicing at the hospital, or on the hospital s staff, and his experience was that Aboriginal patients were sometimes more trusting of an Aboriginal doctor, which would increase their overall quality of care. The hospital denied Mr. Jonas application. Mr. Jonas appealed the hospital s decision to the Board, where he repeated his earlier arguments supporting his application to practice at the hospital. He also argued that Aboriginal patients do not have access to the same quality

4 We have considered the parties arguments. We agree with entire decision is as follows: of the lowest surgery wait times in the region. The Board s need for an additional surgeon, since the hospital had some Aboriginal doctors. The hospital argued that there was no hospital s failure to ensure the hospital provides access to of medical care as non-aboriginal patients, because of the conveyance may, without a warrant, seize any thing(s) that 28. (1) An inspector who is lawfully in a premises or provisions: You notice that the Act contains the following additional The inspector then seized all of Sunny s maple syrup. Inspector Palate went to Sunny Syrup Farm ( Sunny ) to inspect its maple syrup, which was labeled as Grade A. any objectionable odour or taste. Palette concluded that the maple syrup was not free from Upon tasting the maple syrup, Inspector Palate spat it out his mouth to numb his taste buds. Unsurprisingly, Inspector immediately, and then stuffed a handful of nearby snow into is free from any objectionable odour or taste. (b) is uniform in colour and free from any cloudiness or (c) has a maple flavour characteristic of its colour class and (a) is free from fermentation; turbidity; Under the Act, maple syrup can only be labeled Grade A if under the Maple Syrup Monitoring Program. at a maple farm without a warrant and inspect maple syrup syrup. Under section 24 of the Act, an inspector can attend (45 minutes) (the Act ) govern, among other things, the purity of maple 25 MARKS The Ontario Food Safety and Quality Act and its regulations QUESTION 3 FACTS outcome of the judicial review. meaning of the applicable standard(s), and the likely of review for the Board s decision(s), the content or Dr. Jonas would like advice on the applicable standard Question 2 Administrative Tribunals Act apply to the Board. The Act provides that sections 45, 46.2, and 58 of the this time. Dr. Jonas application is denied. the hospital that there is no need for additional surgeons at Page 4 of 5 it is:

5 Page 5 of 5 the inspector believes on reasonable grounds, (a) is evidence of a contravention of this Act. A party that is given notice of an Inspector s decision may appeal to the Court on a question of law arising out of the decision. (2) A party may appeal to the Court only if the Court grants leave to appeal. Question 3 Sunny is now your client. Please advise Sunny on the following; the applicable standard(s) of review for the Inspector s decision(s), the content or meaning of the applicable standard(s), and the likely outcome of the judicial review. Question 4 10 MARKS (a) Section 35 of the BC Forests Act states that a tree farm (16 minutes) license may be issued, if the Minister is satisfied its issuance is consistent with the Act s purpose of promoting environmental sustainability. Your client applied for, and was denied, a tree farm license. The Ministry employee making the decision was not satisfied that the proposed tree farm was consistent with the purpose of the Act because the farm could disturb fish spawning streams nearby. What advice would you give your client about this issue, and the likely outcome? 5 MARKS (b) You are a tribunal member for the Property Assessment (8 minutes) Appeal Board, hearing a dispute in an oral hearing. One of the witnesses giving evidence about his property s value states, My neighbour told me he sold his house for way less money than my house was assessed for. Plus, his house is bigger than mine. He also told me that another neighbour down the street told him that her house sold for even less, last year. The lawyer for the other party, BC Assessment, objects to this evidence on the basis of hearsay. What ruling do you make on this objection, and why? END OF EXAMINATION