诉讼律师可以挑战行政权力!

字体 -

在加拿大,行政机构及仲裁庭(比如移民官员,牌局,职业安全及保险局)有广泛的权力做决定影响民众。他们的决定不仅受到法规约束,也受行政原则限制。两个关键的普通法原则是经常被大众及律师忽视:(1)他们的重要的决定必须有给予理由,这样其合理可被当事人与法官监督; (2)若当事人上诉挑战一行政决定,行政主体可以解释其原因,但不得提供不同的理由来支持最初的决定。最近我在上诉法院挑战枪械法案监管的一个决定,我就第二项原则提出的辩护被证明是一个很有说服力的论点。

Logo.png

In Canada, administrative bodies and tribunals (e.g. immigration officers, licensing bureaus, Workplace Safety and Insurance Board) are given broad powers to make decisions that will affect the public.   As a generally principle, their decision making is governed not only by the applicable statute but also the administrative principles.  Two key common law principles are often forgotten by people including lawyers: (1) the decisions must be accompanied by reasons so that its reasonableness could be scrutinized; and (2) on judicial review, the administrative body is allowed to explain its reason but shall not provide different reasons to justify the initial decision.  In a recent case I argued before the Court of Appeal in a regulatory matter under the Firearms Act, the second principle proved to be a very persuasive argument against the Crown.

分享博文至:
  1. 抱歉,留言栏此时已关闭。