Gill v. Saskatchewan Government Insurance, (2013) 426 Sask.R. 72 (QB)

• Judge: Barrington-Foote, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: July 18, 2013
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (2013), 426 Sask.R. 72 (QB);2013 SKQB 276

Gill v. SGI (2013), 426 Sask.R. 72 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2013] Sask.R. TBEd. JL.091

Manpreet Gill (applicant) v. Saskatchewan Government Insurance, as Administrator and Highway Traffic Board, as Decision Maker (respondents)

(2013 Q.B.G. No. 1252; 2013 SKQB 276)

Indexed As: Gill v. Saskatchewan Government Insurance

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Regina

Barrington-Foote, J.

July 18, 2013.

Summary:

Gill's driver's licence was suspended after police concluded that he had been driving an ATV while impaired. Gill applied to the Highway Traffic Board for a review of the suspension, submitting that he had only been a passenger on the ATV. The Board confirmed the suspension. Gill applied for judicial review.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench allowed the application, quashed the Board's decision and remitted the review application back to the Board.

Administrative Law - Topic 549

The hearing and decision - Decisions of the tribunal - Reasons for decisions - Sufficiency of - Gill's driver's licence was suspended after police concluded that he had been driving an ATV while impaired - Gill applied to the Highway Traffic Board for a review of the suspension - He submitted that he had only been a passenger on the ATV - In support of his position, he provided affidavits from himself, his wife, and his friend who allegedly had been the driver - Police sent the Board a "case file synopsis" which stated that Gill was the only person found in the ATV, and that Gill denied being the driver but didn't know who had been driving - In its reasons for decision, the Board reiterated the evidence provided by Gill and the police, then concluded that Gill was the driver - The Board confirmed the suspension - Gill applied for judicial review - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench allowed the application, quashed the Board's decision and remitted the review application back to the Board - There were direct and irreconcilable differences between Gill's evidence and that forwarded by the police - The Board was obliged to explain why it rejected Gill's sworn evidence and accepted that of the police - Absent such an explanation, the court was left to speculate as to why the Board concluded as it did and whether its conclusion was within the range of acceptable outcomes - Accordingly, the Board's decision was not justified, transparent or intelligible despite the fact that it might have fallen within the range of acceptable outcomes that were defensible in respect of the facts and law - See paragraphs 29 to 36.

Administrative Law - Topic 3202

Judicial review - General - Scope or standard of review - Gill's driver's licence was suspended after police concluded that he had been driving an ATV while impaired - Gill applied to the Highway Traffic Board for a review of the suspension, submitting that he had only been a passenger on the ATV - The Board confirmed the suspension - Gill applied for judicial review - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench held that the appropriate standard of review was reasonableness - The decision to be made by the Board was whether it was "satisfied" that Gill drove the ATV while impaired (Traffic Safety Act, ss. 153(10) and (11)) - That was a question of fact - The fact that a particular standard of proof applied did not convert it to a question of law - The issue before the Board did not require the application of specialized knowledge or expertise - This factor, along with the potential impact of the loss of a driver's licence, supported a lower degree of deference - See paragraphs 12 to 28.

Administrative Law - Topic 9102

Boards and tribunals - Judicial review - Standard of review - [See Administrative Law - Topic 3202 ].

Motor Vehicles - Topic 7240

Licensing and regulation of drivers - Licence - Suspension of - Appeals and judicial review - [See Administrative Law - Topic 549 and Administrative Law - Topic 3202 ].

Cases Noticed:

New Brunswick (Board of Management) v. Dunsmuir, [2008] 1 S.C.R. 190; 372 N.R. 1; 329 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 844 A.P.R. 1; 2008 SCC 9, refd to. [para. 12].

Bukmeier v. Saskatchewan (Minister of Highways and Transportation) (2006), 276 Sask.R. 281; 2006 SKQB 13, folld. [para. 12].

Nagra v. Superintendent of Motor Vehicles (B.C.) et al. (2010), 285 B.C.A.C. 133; 482 W.A.C. 133; 316 D.L.R.(4th) 696; 2010 BCCA 154, folld. [para. 18].

Gordon v. R. et al. (2002), 166 B.C.A.C. 285; 271 W.A.C. 285; 2002 BCCA 224, dist. [para. 22].

Mellor v. Workers' Compensation Board (Sask.) (2012), 385 Sask.R. 210; 536 W.A.C. 210; 2012 SKCA 10, refd to. [para. 25].

Vancouver International Airport Authority et al. v. Public Service Alliance of Canada (2010), 403 N.R. 363; 2010 FCA 158, refd to. [para. 26].

2127423 Manitoba Ltd. v. Unicity Taxi Ltd. et al. (2012), 280 Man.R.(2d) 292; 548 W.A.C. 292; 353 D.L.R.(4th) 83; 2012 MBCA 75, refd to. [para. 28].

Counsel:

Riley Potter, for the applicant;

Keith D. Kilback, for the Highway Traffic Board;

No one appearing for Saskatchewan Government Insurance.

This application for judicial review was heard before Barrington-Foote, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Regina, who delivered the following judgment on July 18, 2013.