Fairhaven Billiards Inc. v. Liquor and Gaming Authority (Sask.), (1998) 165 Sask.R. 281 (QB)

• Judge: Dielschneider, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: May 08, 1998
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1998), 165 Sask.R. 281 (QB)

Fairhaven Billiards v. Liq. & Gaming (1998), 165 Sask.R. 281 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1998] Sask.R. TBEd. MY.062

In The Matter Of Judicial Review Pursuant to Part 52 of the Rules of Court;

And In The Matter Of an Application by Fairhaven Billiards Inc. to set aside a Decision of the Saskatchewan Liquor Gaming and Licensing Commission, dated November 26, 1997, Regarding a Decision of the Saskatchewan Liquor and Gaming Authority to Deny a Special Use (Sporting Facility) Permit.

Fairhaven Billiards Inc. v. Saskatchewan Liquor and Gaming Authority

(1998 Q.B. No. 726)

Indexed As: Fairhaven Billiards Inc. v. Liquor and Gaming Authority (Sask.)

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Saskatoon

Dielschneider, J.

May 8, 1998.

Summary:

Fairhaven Billiards applied to the Saskatchewan Liquor and Gaming Authority for a permit to sell alcoholic beverages. The Authority denied the permit. Fairhaven appealed. The Saskatchewan Liquor and Gaming Licensing Commission affirmed the Authority's decision. Fairhaven applied to quash the Commission's decision.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application.

Administrative Law - Topic 8264

Administrative powers - Discretionary powers - Fettering of discretion - Fair­haven Billiards applied to the Saskatchewan Liquor and Gaming Author­ity for a permit to sell alcoholic beverages - The Authority denied the permit, in­form­ing Fairhaven that it had a policy which restricted the number of billiard hall liquor permits according to the population of each community - Fairhaven appealed - The Saskatchewan Liquor and Gaming Licens­ing Commission affirmed the Auth­ority's decision - Fairhaven sought to quash the Commission's decision, arguing that the Commission was governed by the Author­ity's policy rather than by the merits of the evidence, that the Commission allowed itself to be fettered by the Auth­ority's policy and that its decision was patently unreasonable - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application - The Commission did not reach its decision because of the Author­ity's policy, but was persuaded by the merits of the evidence - Its decision was not patently unreasonable.

Administrative Law - Topic 9026

Boards and tribunals - Jurisdiction - Loss of - By fettering of discretion - [See Ad­ministrative Law - Topic 8264 ].

Liquor Control - Topic 4287

Licensing - Denial, suspension or termi­na­tion of licence - Application for review - [See Administrative Law - Topic 8264 ].

Cases Noticed:

Hopedale Developments Ltd. v. Oakville (Town), [1965] 1 O.R. 259 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

Service Employees' International Union, Local 333 v. Nipawin District Staff Nurses' Association et al., [1975] 1 S.C.R. 382; 41 D.L.R.(3d) 6, refd to. [para. 12].

Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 963 v. New Brunswick Liquor Corp., [1979] 2 S.C.R. 227; 26 N.R. 341; 25 N.B.R.(2d) 237; 51 A.P.R. 237; 97 D.L.R.(3d) 417; 79 C.L.L.C. 14,209, refd to. [para. 13].

Burt, Davis, Popoff et al. v. Armadale Publishers Ltd. et al., [1976] 1 W.W.R. 350 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

Bell Canada v. Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1722; 97 N.R. 15; 60 D.L.R.(4th) 682, refd to. [para. 15].

Syndicat national des employés de la Com­mission scolaire régionale de l'Outaouais (CSN) v. Union des employés de service, local 298 (FTQ), [1988] 2 S.C.R. 1048; 95 N.R. 161; 24 Q.A.C. 244; 35 Admin. L.R. 153, refd to. [para. 16].

Union des employés de services, local 298 v. Bibeault - see Syndicat national des employés de la commission scolaire régionale de l'Outaouais (CSN) v. Union des employés de service, local 298 (FTQ).

Bibeault - see Syndicat national des em­ployés de la commission scolaire région­ale de l'Outaouais (CSN) v. Union des employés de service, local 298.

Counsel:

K. Sandstrom, for the applicant;

R. Linka, for the respondent.

This application was heard before Diel­schneider, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Saska­toon, who delivered the following judgment on May 8, 1998.