Toronto (City) Board of Education v. O.S.S.T.F., District 15

SCCInfoBox
case-name=Toronto (City) Board of Education v. O.S.S.T.F., District 15
full-case-name=
heard-date=November 6, 1996
decided-date=February 27, 1997
citations= [1997] 1 S.C.R. 487
docket=24724
history=
ruling=Appeal allowed
ratio=
SCC=1996-1997
Majority=Cory J. (paras. 1-79)
JoinMajority=Lamer C.J. and La Forest, Sopinka, Gonthier, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major JJ.
Concurrence=L'Heureux-Dube J. (paras. 80-100)
NotParticipating=
LawsApplied=

"Toronto (City) Board of Education v. O.S.S.T.F., District 15", [1997] 1 S.C.R. 487 is a leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on judicial review of administrative decisions. The Court held that the review of a just cause dismissal was patently unreasonable on the basis that the decision had no evidentiary basis.

Background

Jagdish Bhadauria, a secondary school teacher, had made many applications for a position of vice-principal. He was granted several interviews but never hired. He filed a complaint to the human rights commission for discrimination. His claim of systemic discrimination was not made out and his claim was rejected.

Bhadauria was subjected to psychiatric assessment to two separate doctors. Both doctors believed he was intent on frightening the board of education but was not likely to be violent. One opinion stated recommended therapy. On receipt of both medical opinions Bhadauria's position as a teacher. Bhadauria filed a grievance through his union for termination without just cause.

The Board of Arbitration found that Bhadauria was dismissed without just cause and was given an award. The Board of Education applied for judicial review to the divisional court who quashed the ruling. On appeal to the Ontario Court of Appeal the arbitration award was restored.

The issue before the Supreme Court was whether "the Board of Arbitration made a patently unreasonable decision in ordering that Mr. Bhadauria be conditionally reinstated in his position as a teacher with the appellant Board of Education." [para. 1]

Reasons of the Court

Justice Cory, writing for the majority, allowed the appeal.

Cory found that the proper standard of review of a finding of "just cause" is one of patent unreasonableness based on the privative clause of the board's constituting legislation and the factual nature of the question. Courts should give great deference where the decision rests largely on findings of facts based on evidence presented at a hearing.

The arbitration board had found that Bhadauria's misconduct was temporary as it was due to his frustration at the school board, and that he was not beyond redemption. The Court held that there was no evidence at all that supported these claims and so ruled that the conclusion was patently unreasonable.

References

ee also

* List of Supreme Court of Canada cases

External links

*