Developments in Administrative Law: The 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 Terms

Supreme Court Law Review, Vol. 38, p. 55, 2007

56 Pages Posted: 21 Feb 2009 Last revised: 10 Nov 2009

See all articles by Laverne Jacobs

Laverne Jacobs

University of Windsor - Faculty of Law; University of California, Berkeley - Berkeley Center on Comparative Equality & Anti-Discrimination Law

Date Written: November 3, 2007

Abstract

The 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 terms produced several noteworthy decisions in the area of administrative law, furthering administrative law jurisprudence in three key areas: the relationship between constitutional and administrative law, especially with respect to judicial review of exercises of administrative discretion that affect Charter rights and freedoms (Multani v. Commission scolaire Marguerite Bourgeoys); exclusive and concurrent jurisdiction (Tranchemontagne v. Ontario (Director, Disability Support Program) and Bisaillon v. Concordia University) and standard of review (Livis (City) v. Fraternite des policiers de Livis Inc. and Council of Canadians with Disabilities v. Via Rail Canada Inc.). Overall, there was a strong synergy between administrative law and human rights matters over the past two terms, with human rights issues driving many of the recent developments in the field.

Keywords: administrative law, jurisdiction, Charter review, exclusive and concurrent jurisdiction, standard of review, Supreme Court of Canada

Suggested Citation

Jacobs, Laverne, Developments in Administrative Law: The 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 Terms (November 3, 2007). Supreme Court Law Review, Vol. 38, p. 55, 2007, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1301787

Laverne Jacobs (Contact Author)

University of Windsor - Faculty of Law ( email )

401 Sunset Avenue
Windsor, Ontario N9B 3P4 N9B 3P4
Canada

HOME PAGE: http://www.uwindsor.ca/law/ljacobs

University of California, Berkeley - Berkeley Center on Comparative Equality & Anti-Discrimination Law ( email )

Boalt Hall
Berkeley, CA 94720-7200
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
93
Abstract Views
604
Rank
506,290
PlumX Metrics