IS JUDICIAL REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION GUARANTEED BY THE BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT?
AbstractAfter reviewing the section 96 stipulation against provincial investment in tribunals whose jurisdiction properly belongs to superior, district or county courts, and the policy underlying that law, this article seeks to clarify the uncertainty surrounding the functions belonging to a superior, district or county court, and the effect of such functions on the status of judicial review. It considers the role of privative clauses in protecting tribunal decisions from judicial review and surveys Canadian case law, in order to argue that the mere fact that a tribunal’s decision is immune from review does not make that tribunal a superior, district or county court. The author refutes the argument that an implied guarantee of jurisdiction is a constitutional function of superior courts, and argues in favour of well-worded privative clauses based on implicit limits within section 96.
Keywords:Administrative Law, Constitutional Law
Download data is not yet available.