Ontario Gives Statutory Tribunals Discretion to Conduct Proceedings Electronically Amid COVID-19

by Rozmin Mediratta March 30, 2020 2 min read

In the midst of COVID-19, the proceedings of many health colleges, and consequently of the health professionals they regulate, have been in limbo while everyone finds a way forward. 

On March 25, 2020, the Ontario government enacted the Hearings in Tribunal Proceedings (Temporary Measures) Act, 2020 (the “Act”) to help the process along.

The Act empowers statutory tribunals with more discretion as to how proceedings before them are held.

Prior to the Act, a statutory tribunal could make rules governing the practice and procedure before it under section 25.1 of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act (or “SPPA”), including whether or not to hold electronic hearings (SPPA, s. 5.2). However, under the SPPA, a “hearing” is limited to the hearing in a proceeding. In contrast, under the Act, a “hearing” is much broader, and includes not only the hearing in a proceeding, but any other appearance in the course of the proceeding, including pre-hearing conferences or alternative dispute resolution processes. 

The Act prevails over the SPPA, any rules previously made by a tribunal, or any other legislation, allowing administrative bodies (such as health colleges) to move their matters forward electronically regardless of whether they previously had anything in place in that regard. Under the Act, a tribunal may conduct a hearing in person, electronically, in writing or by a combination of any of them. Moreover, a tribunal may make any orders, give any directions, or make rules respecting the format of a hearing, and “any matters ancillary to the holding of the hearing”, including the service or filing of materials for the hearing, attendance at the hearing, recording of the hearing, or public access to the hearing.

Finally, the Act applies to retroactively, i.e. to proceedings that were commenced before the Act came into force.

Although the word “temporary” appears in the title of the legislation, the Act is not set to expire after a set amount of time, but is instead “to be repealed on proclamation of the Lieutenant Governor”. It will be interesting to see how long the Act will be in place for, and whether the SPPA will later be amended to permanently adopt the Act’s measures.   

For now, we hope that the Act will enable health colleges to move matters forward in a fair and expeditious manner.



Also in Blog

Bill 218: Supporting Ontario’s Recovery Act, 2020

by Valerie Wise October 23, 2020 3 min read

On October 20, 2020, the Ontario government introduced legislation to provide protection from liability for workers, volunteers and organizations who make “good faith efforts” to comply with federal, provincial or municipal law and public health guidance relating to COVID-19.   
Cases to Watch: Marchi v. Nelson

by Mina Karabit September 22, 2020 3 min read

In August 2020, the Supreme Court heard and granted leave to appeal in Marchi v. Nelson, a case from the British Columbia Court of Appeal. The decision is one to watch as it will likely result in a renewed discussion of the distinction of policy versus operational decisions and their impacts on liability in tort law. The discussion will likely impact many of the anticipated post-COVID-19 lawsuits against public and government institutions.
Judicial Review: New Time Limits and a Helpful Primer

by Mina Karabit September 17, 2020 4 min read

In December 2019, Ontario’s Attorney General introduced Bill 161, the Smarter and Stronger Justice Act (the “Act”), which became law on July 8, 2020. The Act hopes to simplify a complex and outdated justice system by bringing changes to how legal aid services are delivered, how class actions are handled, and how court processes are administered.

Of note, the Act has amended the Judicial Review Procedures Act (JRPA) to establish new rules as to when an application for judicial review may be brought.

Any decisions made on or after July 8, 2020 are now subject to a 30-day limit for bringing an application for judicial review unless another Act provides otherwise. Courts, however, retain powers to extend the time for making an application for judicial review if satisfied that there are apparent grounds for relief and that no prejudice or hardship will be incurred by the delay. Before these amendments, the JRPA did not set out any time limits for bringing an application, but courts had powers to extend the time to bring an application if another Act prescribed the limit.