Tribunal review

Saikaley (Re), 2012 ONCA 92 deals, among other things, with the standard of review of a tribunal or administrative tribunal. The Court holds:

[36]       Deference will generally be accorded to a tribunal's interpretation of its home statute or statutes that are "closely connected to its function", and may also be warranted where a tribunal has developed expertise in applying a general rule of common or civil law in specific statutory contexts: Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick, 2008 SCC 9, [2008] 1 S.C.R. 190, at para. 54. Correctness is the appropriate standard of review for constitutional questions, particularly questions of Charter interpretation: see Barrie Public Utilities v. Canadian Cable Television Assn., 2003 SCC 28, [2003] 1 S.C.R. 476, at para. 66 and United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 1518 (U.F.C.W.) v. KMart Canada Ltd., [1999] 2 S.C.R. 1083, at paras. 69-70. However, where the question is one of discretion, deference usually applies automatically: see Dunsmuir, at para. 53. The determination of an appropriate s. 24(1) Charter remedy generally involves an exercise of discretion: R. v. Carosella, [1997] 1 S.C.R. 80, at para. 48.