Reasons and grounds for Federal Court Appeals
The most common reasons for allowing an application for judicial review are:
- the decision-maker made an error in law, whether that error was obvious or not;
- the decision-maker got the facts wrong at a fundamental level, or appears to have ignored a fact of fundamental importance;
- the decision-maker violated a principle of natural justice or failed to observe procedural fairness;
- the decision goes beyond the authority conferred upon the decision-maker by the IRPA and the Regulations.
Determine your grounds to appeal to the Federal Court of Canada before applying for judicial review.
The grounds for judicial review
There should be valid grounds to apply for judicial review, such as error of law, and /or error of fact.
The examples of the grounds for judicial review:
Errors of law:
- acting without jurisdiction or beyond jurisdiction
- breaching a principle of procedural fairness
- bias of the decision-maker (this ground must be raised before the decision-maker at the first available opportunity)
- fettering* discretion
- applying the wrong legal test
- acting contrary to law
- misinterpreting statute or case law or ignoring statute or case law
- ignoring evidence
- making unreasonable inferences
Errors of fact:
- an incorrect determination of fact based on the evidence
Errors of mixed fact and law:
- the decision-maker misapplies a legal test to a set of facts
* Fettering: Refusing to exercise discretion or refusing to make a decision.