Granted
Administrative Law/Police: Mandamus
Royal Canadian Mounted Police External Review Committee, et al. v. Benison, et al., 2026 FCA 53 (42332)
The R.C.M.P. External Review Committee (ERC) was an independent, quasi-judicial tribunal established through the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act. It was “seized” by the RCMP’s Office for the Coordination of Grievances and Appeals when a member of the RCMP initiated an appeal of an internal RCMP labour-related decision. The ERC then analyzed the file and issued non-binding findings and recommendations to the RCMP Commissioner, who decided the appeal and thus may, with justifications, or may not follow the ERC’s recommendations. A series of legislative and regulatory amendments in 2014 increased the ERC’s workload significantly, tripling its case load and triggering the ERC to create a triaging system. The Respondents are current or former members of the RCMP subjected to a disciplinary measure, for the most part resulting in financial penalties between two and thirty days’ pay, or who put forward a harassment complaint that was dismissed after an investigation. All of the Respondents have at least one outstanding appeal before the ERC that was received from the RCMP and pre-screened by the ERC as complete and ready for review. The Respondents sought two writs of mandamus to: (1) compel the ERC to complete its review of the appeals they had filed of certain internal RCMP decisions within 30 calendar days of the decision and (2) to publish and report on the service standards that apply to the review of every appeal file before it. The Fed. Court dismissed the Respondents’ J.R. application and request for two mandamus orders. The Fed. C.A. allowed the appeal in part. The first writ of mandamus was granted, and ERC was ordered to issue findings and recommendations in each outstanding appeal within six months, with leave to seek an extension on reasonable grounds. The appeal was dismissed respecting the second mandamus request regarding compelling all-inclusive service standards. “The motion to expedite the application for leave to appeal is granted. The motion to expedite the hearing of the appeal is dismissed. The application for leave to appeal…is granted.”
Civil Litigation/Arbitration: Standard of Review
Buffalo Point First Nation, et al. v. Buffalo Point Cottage Owners Association Inc., 2025 MBCA 72 (42053)
The parties were involved in numerous arbitrations and court proceedings. They entered into a settlement agreement, which included a provision the arbitrator retained jurisdiction to implement the settlement and the award in the event of any remaining remedial issues between the parties. Two arbitrations were initiated by the Buffalo Point Cottage Owners Association Inc. (the “Association”). The arbitrator issued two supplementary awards. The Manitoba Court of King’s Bench granted leave to appeal the awards. The issue on appeal was whether the arbitrator erred by ordering awards that amended the settlement. The judge determined correctness applied to questions of law, and concluded the arbitrator exceeded the scope of his jurisdiction. Portions of the supplementary awards at issue were set aside. The Man. C.A. granted the Association leave to appeal on the issue of whether the judge identified the correct standard of review. The court held the judge erred and reasonableness applied to appeals of commercial arbitrations decisions. Applying this standard, the court found the second supplementary award was reasonable, reinstating the portions of the award at issue. “The application for leave to appeal…is granted with costs in the cause.”
Dismissed
Insurance: MVA’s; Statutory Benefits
Rumball v. Traders General Insurance Company, 2025 ONCA 656 (42113)
Ms. Rumball was in a MVA on December 28, 2014. She applied to her insurer, Traders General Insurance Company, for statutory accident benefits due to her inability to work. Ms. Rumball testified she developed chronic pain, soft tissue injuries, and other medical conditions as a result of the accident. Prior to the accident, Ms. Rumball worked as an educational assistant with a school board, working 35 hours per week. In 2014, she had begun a business as a wedding planner. Ms. Rumball returned to work as an educational assistant on February 25, 2015, but stopped on May 31, 2015, stating she was unable to do her job. She completed a number of weddings following the accident but required the assistance of family members. The Adjudicator determined Ms. Rumball was entitled to income replacement benefits up to the 104-week period only. Reconsideration of the Adjudicator’s decision was dismissed. The Divisional Court found no error in the Arbitrator’s decision or its application of the statutory test and dismissed the appeal. The Ont. C.A. dismissed the appeal. “The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed with costs.”
Municipal Law: Disqualification
Commission municipale du Québec (Direction des enquêtes et des poursuites en intégrité municipale) v. Arnold, 2025 QCCA 1034 (42048)
The Commission municipale du Québec brought an action for a declaration of disqualification pursuant to art. 938.4 of the Municipal Code of Québec.1, and s. 308 of the Act respecting elections and referendums in municipalities, against the mayor of Grenville-sur-la-Rouge, Thomas Arnold. It alleged Mr. Arnold authorized or effected the awarding and making of contracts for the purchase and delivery of abrasive sand without complying with the applicable rules. It requested he be declared disqualified for a period of two years. The Québec Superior Court found Mr. Arnold interfered with the call for tenders process. In the opinion of the judge, Mr. Arnold did not act knowingly. While his conduct proved to be irregular and erroneous, it was not a case of misconduct akin to a misappropriation of moneys or a breach of trust. The Qué. C.A. was of the opinion the trial judge had not committed any error in interpreting the term “knowingly” (“sciemment”) used in art. 938.4 para. 1 of the Municipal Code of Québec. The municipal councillor in respect of which an application for a declaration of disqualification is made must have been aware, at the time of the relevant facts, their actions violated the applicable rules or measures relating to the awarding of municipal contracts, which is not the case here. The appeal was dismissed. “The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed with costs. Justice Côté took no part in the judgment.”
Real Property: Neighbour Water Flow Issues
Boutom, et al. v. Sauriol, et al., 2025 QCCA 61 (42130)
A dispute between owners of neighbouring residences, making various accusations against each other following landscaping work carried out by the Applicants, Mr. Boutom and Ms. Kouélieu. The Respondents, Mr. Sauriol and Ms. Richard-Sauriol, alleged water flow problems and neighbourhood disturbances, whereas Mr. Boutom and Ms. Kouélieu reported constant surveillance, denigration, harassment, racial discrimination and invasions of their privacy. The Québec Superior Court allowed in part the originating application of Mr. Sauriol and Ms. Richard-Sauriol, ordered various corrective measures as well as the payment of damages, while dismissing the cross demand of Mr. Boutom and Ms. Kouélieu. The Qué. C.A. dismissed the appeal and upheld the trial judgment. “The motion for an extension of time to serve and file the application for leave to appeal is granted. The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed.”