36917 Sobeys West Inc., Jace Holdings Ltd. v. College of Pharmacists of British Columbia
(B.C.) (Civil) (By Leave)
Administrative law – Judicial review – Standard of review
The respondent is the regulatory body responsible for registering and licensing pharmacists and pharmacy technicians in British Columbia in accordance with its authority under the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 183. In 2013, the respondent’s board adopted bylaws prohibiting pharmacists from making incentive programs available to customers in order to induce them to purchase pharmacy services, drugs or devices from particular pharmacies. The applicants are pharmacies offering customer benefits and loyalty programs to customers. They brought a petition to quash the bylaws as being unreasonable, arguing, inter alia: i) there was no evidence of actual harm justifying such a broad prohibition of incentives; ii) the bylaws went beyond what would be required to address the theoretical harms; and iii) the bylaws had a net effect of being harmful to the public interest. The Supreme Court of British Columbia struck down the bylaws as being overbroad and unreasonable. The appellate court allowed the respondent’s appeal and set aside the lower court order.
36949 Attorney General of Canada v. Helmut Oberlander
Citizenship – Canadian citizens – Revocation of citizenship
Mr. Oberlander was born in Halbstadt, Ukraine in 1924, and he obtained his Canadian citizenship in 1960. In 1995, he received a notice that the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration’s intention to make a report to the Governor in Council recommending revocation of his Canadian citizenship. The Minister alleged that Mr. Oberlander had failed to disclose his activities during World War II to Canadian immigration and citizenship officials. At Mr. Oberlander’s request, the Minister referred the case to the Federal Court to determine whether he had obtained his citizenship on the basis of a false representation, fraud, or by knowingly concealing material circumstances. The Federal Court found that Mr. Oberlander had served as an interpreter for the Einsatzkommando 10a, a unit involved in war crimes, and that Mr. Oberlander had obtained his Canadian citizenship by making a false representation or by knowingly concealing material circumstances, and facts as to the nature of his service during World War II: (2000), 185 F.T.R. 41. This decision is final and non-reviewable. The Minister then recommended that the Governor in Council revoke Mr. Oberlander’s Canadian citizenship. It has now been revoked by the Governor in Council on three occasions. Each time, it was referred back for reconsideration by the Federal Court of Appeal. Subsequent to the latest revocation, but before the Federal Court decision, this Court decided Ezokola v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2013 SCC 40, which set out a new test for complicity.
The Federal Court found no reviewable error and dismissed the application for judicial review. The Federal Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment of the Federal Court and, pronouncing the judgment that should have been made, remitted the issues of complicity and duress to the Governor in Council for redetermination in accordance with the law.