General Insurance Council v. Howatt, (2000) 264 A.R. 33 (QB)

• Judge: Rowbotham, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: October 15, 1999
• Citations: (2000), 264 A.R. 33 (QB);2000 ABQB 259

General Ins. Council v. Howatt (2000), 264 A.R. 33 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2000] A.R. TBEd. MY.037

The General Insurance Council (appellant) v. Lauraine Howatt (respondent)

(Action No. 9901-08648; 2000 ABQB 259)

Indexed As: General Insurance Council v. Howatt

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Calgary

Rowbotham, J.

April 19, 2000.

Summary:

An insurance agent was found guilty by the General Insurance Council on several charges of professional misconduct. The agent successfully appealed to the Insur­ance Coun­cils Appeal Board. The Coun­cil further appealed.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dis­missed the appeal.

Administrative Law - Topic 9122

Boards and tribunals - Administrative appeals - Scope of appeal or standard of review - An insurance agent was found guilty by the General Insurance Council on several charges of professional misconduct - The agent successfully appealed to the Insurance Councils Appeal Board - The Council further appealed - At issue was the appropriate standard of review - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that "the appropriate standard of review in this case is that of reasonableness ... The legis­lation does not include a privative clause. The Regulation (s. 27) provides for a right of appeal. That appeal is confined to a question of law or jurisdiction. This is indicative of a standard higher than that of correctness. It seems to me that if the 'correctness' standard had been intended, the legislation would have included an appeal of law and fact" - See paragraph 29.

Insurance - Topic 442

Agents - Discipline - Professional mis­con­duct - An insurance agent and owner of an insurance agency was found guilty by the General Insurance Council on sev­eral charges of professional misconduct, and fined - She had allegedly failed to inform clients of periods during which they had been mis­takenly left uninsured, but for which pre­miums had been collected - The Council found the agent guilty of deceit and misrepresentation and also that she had acted in an incompetent and un­trustworthy manner - The agent suc­cess­fully appealed to the Insur­ance Coun­cils Appeal Board - The Council further appealed - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the appeal - The Board had reached a reason­able, and cor­rect, conclusion.

Cases Noticed:

Tenorlas v. Superintendent of Insurance (Ont.) (1989), 32 O.A.C. 245 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 20].

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, refd to. [para. 24].

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

Union des employés de service, 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).

U.E.S., Local 298 v. Bibeault - Union des employés de service.

Pezim v. British Columbia Securities Com­mission et al., [1994] 2 S.C.R. 557; 168 N.R. 321; 46 B.C.A.C. 1; 75 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 26].

K.C. v. College of Physical Therapists (Alta.) (1999), 244 A.R. 28; 209 W.A.C. 28 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 27].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Jones, D.P., Standards of Review, Cana­dian Bar Association, Alberta Branch, Municipal Law Section, March 15, 2000, generally [para. 22].

Counsel:

T.J. Boyle (Spier Harben), for the appel­lant;

B.R. Hougestol (Dobko Hougestol & Golden), for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on October 15, 1999, by Rowbotham, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Calgary, who released the following decision on April 19, 2000.