Administrative Law: Procedural Fairness, Standard of Review, and Remedies
What the Exam Tests in Administrative Law
The Administrative Law domain tests the Statutory Powers Procedure Act (SPPA), the duty of procedural fairness, the standard of review after Vavilov, and the remedies available on judicial review. Questions often turn on whether a decision-maker followed fair procedure and whether the decision is reasonable.
Core Rules and Concepts
- Procedural fairness. The content of fairness depends on the context: the nature of the decision, the statutory scheme, the importance to the individual, and the legitimate expectations. Core elements include notice, disclosure, and an opportunity to respond.
- SPPA. The SPPA governs tribunals and provides rules on notice, hearings, evidence, and reasons.
- Standard of review. After Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, the presumptive standard is reasonableness, with correctness for certain categories (constitutional questions, questions of law of central importance to the legal system, and jurisdictional boundaries between competing tribunals).
- Reasonableness. A reasonable decision is justified, transparent, and intelligible, and falls within a range of acceptable outcomes.
- Remedies. Judicial review may result in certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, or declaratory relief. The court may quash and remit.
- Privative clauses. A strong privative clause does not oust judicial review entirely; it informs the reasonableness analysis.
Worked Example
A tribunal revokes a licence without disclosing the complaint to the licensee. The licensee seeks judicial review. The failure to disclose breaches procedural fairness, and the court may quash the decision and remit it for a new hearing. The standard of review is reasonableness, but the fairness breach is a threshold issue that can lead to a remedy regardless of the substantive reasonableness of the outcome.
Traps That Cost Marks
- Applying correctness as the default standard after Vavilov.
- Treating procedural fairness as identical in every tribunal context.
- Assuming a privative clause bars judicial review entirely.
- Forgetting that remitting to the decision-maker is a common remedy.
- Missing that reasons are part of the reasonableness analysis.