Judicial Review: A Guide to Understanding the Process

What is Judicial Review? Judicial review is the legal process where a court evaluates the lawfulness of decisions made by government bodies, tribunals, or public authorities. It ensures that the decisions comply with legal principles and respect fairness. Unlike an appeal, judicial review does not revisit the facts but checks whether the decision-maker acted within their authority and followed correct procedures.

Grounds for Judicial Review:

Illegality: The decision-maker may have acted outside their powers. For example, if a tribunal made a ruling on a matter it had no legal authority to decide, that decision could be overturned for being illegal. This was evident in the case of Turkiewicz v. Ontario Labour Relations Board, where the court quashed decisions because they were based on an improper interpretation of the Labour Relations Act.
Procedural Fairness: Every party must be given a fair opportunity to present their case. This includes providing proper notice of hearings, the opportunity to respond to evidence, and a decision made by an unbiased body. Procedural fairness failures often result in a decision being quashed. For instance, in Michalski v. McMaster University students argued that their requests for COVID-19 vaccine exemptions were not handled fairly.
Unreasonableness: A decision may be set aside if it is so unreasonable that no properly informed decision-maker could have arrived at the same conclusion. In the landmark case of Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, the Supreme Court set the standard of review for determining the reasonableness of a decision(2023fca214).
Error of Law: The court may intervene if the decision-maker misapplies the law or legal principles. This can include applying incorrect statutory interpretations or legal doctrines. For example, in Heiltsuk Horizon Maritime Services Ltd. v. Atlantic Towing Ltd., judicial review was granted due to misinterpretation of bid evaluation requirements during a procurement process.

The Legal Process of Judicial Review:

Filing the Application: Judicial review begins when an application is filed in court, often within 30 days of the decision. In Ontario, the process is governed by the Judicial Review Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. J.1. The applicant outlines the reasons they believe the decision was flawed.
The Role of the Court: The reviewing court does not rehear the case but focuses on the procedure and legality of the decision. The court may review documents, hear arguments, and assess whether the decision was made in compliance with the law and principles of fairness.

Possible Outcomes:

Quashing the Decision: If the court finds that the decision-maker erred, it can quash the decision, meaning it no longer stands. The matter may then be sent back to the decision-maker to reconsider in line with the court’s directions.
No Action: If the court finds no fault with the original decision, the judicial review will be dismissed, and the decision remains valid.

Examples of Judicial Review in Action:

Labour Relations Case: In Turkiewicz, the Ontario Labour Relations Board’s declaration was found unreasonable because it failed to assess whether its findings served a labor relations purpose. The court quashed the decision, emphasizing the need for a clear legal framework and purpose.
Educational Disputes: Michalski v. McMaster University involved students challenging a university’s vaccine mandate. They argued that their religious exemption requests were handled unfairly. The court examined whether the university acted reasonably and fairly under public health guidelines.
Procurement Process: In Heiltsuk Horizon Maritime Services Ltd. v. Atlantic Towing Ltd., a dispute arose over bid evaluations for a federal contract. The reviewing court assessed whether the government followed the required procurement standards.

When Should You Consider Judicial Review?

Judicial review is a complex legal process and should generally be considered when: