Lloyd v. Transportation Safety Bd.,

• Judge: Graesser, J.
• Neutral Citation: 2012 ABQB 443
• Citation: (2012), 546 A.R. 116 (QB),2012 ABQB 443,[1993] 3 WWR 630,7 Alta LR (3d) 182,[1993] CarswellAlta 257,[1993] AJ No 4 (QL),15 CPC (3d) 201,546 A.R. 116,546 AR 116,(2012), 546 AR 116 (QB),[1993] A.J. No 4 (QL)
• Date: 08 June 2012
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)

Lloyd v. Transportation Safety Bd. (2012), 546 A.R. 116 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2012] A.R. TBEd. AU.001

Ryan Thomas Lloyd (applicant) v. Alberta (Transportation Safety Board) and Registrar of Motor Vehicle Services (respondents)

(1203 04029; 2012 ABQB 443)

Indexed As: Lloyd v. Transportation Safety Board (Alta.) et al.

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Edmonton

Graesser, J.

July 5, 2012.

Summary:

Lloyd was issued an administrative licence suspension under the Traffic Safety Act. He appealed the suspension. The Alberta Transportation Safety Board denied the appeal. Lloyd applied for judicial review and an order of certiorari against the Board's decision.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench allowed the application, quashed the Board's decision and remitted the matter back to the Board for a new decision that applied the court's findings and determinations.

Administrative Law - Topic 2142

Natural justice - Administrative decisions or findings - Findings not sustainable by evidence - [See Administrative Law - Topic 2272 ].

Administrative Law - Topic 2155

Natural justice - Administrative decisions or findings - Effect of failure of tribunal or official to give reasons for decisions (incl. sufficiency of reasons) - [See Administrative Law - Topic 2272 ].

Administrative Law - Topic 2272

Natural justice - The duty of fairness - Circumstances or powers to which duty applies - A police officer found a vehicle blocking an intersection - Lloyd was in the driver's seat and unable to speak coherently - He provided breath samples that showed blood alcohol levels in the range of .02 to .03 - He was charged with impaired driving and given an administrative licence suspension under the Traffic Safety Act - The Crown dropped the impaired driving charge - Lloyd appealed the suspension - The Alberta Transportation Safety Board upheld the suspension - Lloyd applied for judicial review and an order of certiorari against the Board's decision - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench allowed the application - An administrative tribunal entitled to the highest level of deference still had to provide parties with the same level of fairness as an administrative tribunal entitled to less deference - Under s. 39(5)(a.1) of the Act, the Board's responsibility was to satisfy itself on a balance of probabilities that Lloyd's impairment had been caused by alcohol, drugs or a combination of alcohol and drugs - There was no evidence of any sort of drug consumption - The Board had failed in its duty of fairness by applying the s. 39(5)(a.1) test improperly, by failing to give adequate reasons for its rejection of expert evidence, and by misapprehending the expert evidence/opinion - Failures relating to the Board's duty of fairness ordinarily required that the matter be remitted back to the Board for a rehearing - However, the court found that the Board would have no choice but to conclude that the evidence did not support a finding under s. 39(5)(a.1), or that it would be unable to make that finding on a balance of probabilities - As a result, the court quashed the Board's decision and remitted the matter back to the Board for a new decision that would apply the court's findings and determinations - See paragraphs 52 to 62.

Administrative Law - Topic 3202

Judicial review - General - Scope or standard of review - The applicant applied for judicial review of a decision of the Alberta Transportation Safety Board - Section 47.1(3) of the Traffic Safety Act stated that the standard of review for decisions or orders of the Board was patent unreasonableness - The section had been enacted prior to the decision in Dunsmuir (2008 SCC) which essentially abolished the common law standard of patent unreasonableness - The applicant submitted that Dunsmuir changed the meaning of patently unreasonable that had been set out in Ryan (2003 SCC) - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that Dunsmuir did not change the standard of review under s. 47.1(3) - The appropriate test was patent unreasonableness and Ryan provided the guidance for that test - See paragraphs 10 to 19.

Administrative Law - Topic 3221

Judicial review - General - Unreasonableness of decision attacked - [See Motor Vehicles - Topic 7240 ].

Administrative Law - Topic 9102

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

Motor Vehicles - Topic 7222.1

Licensing and regulation of drivers - Licence - Suspension of - Administrative review - [See Motor Vehicles - Topic 7240 ].

Motor Vehicles - Topic 7225.3

Licensing and regulation of drivers - Licence - Suspension of - Administrative or summary suspension - Impaired driving incidents - [See Motor Vehicles - Topic 7240 ].

Motor Vehicles - Topic 7233

Licensing and regulation of drivers - Licence - Suspension of - Evidence and proof - [See Motor Vehicles - Topic 7240 ].

Motor Vehicles - Topic 7240

Licensing and regulation of drivers - Licence - Suspension of - Appeals and judicial review - A police officer found a vehicle blocking an intersection - Lloyd was in the driver's seat and unable to speak coherently - He provided breath samples that showed blood alcohol levels in the range of .02 to .03 - He was charged with impaired driving and given an administrative licence suspension under the Traffic Safety Act - The Crown dropped the impaired driving charge - Lloyd appealed the suspension - The Alberta Transportation Safety Board upheld the suspension - Lloyd applied for judicial review and an order of certiorari against the Board's decision - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench allowed the application - The appeal was not an appeal of the police officer's decision - The Board was required to conduct a fresh inquiry based on the evidence put before it - Under s. 39(5)(a.1) of the Act, the Board's responsibility was to satisfy itself on a balance of probabilities that Lloyd's impairment had been caused by alcohol, drugs or a combination of alcohol and drugs - There was no evidence of any sort of drug consumption - The Board stated that it was satisfied with regard to public safety that Lloyd had operated a motor vehicle while impaired - Public safety was not a relevant consideration - The Board's decision and application of the test were patently unreasonable - The court quashed the Board's decision and remitted the matter back to the Board for a new decision that applied the court's findings and determinations - See paragraphs 24 to 47.

Cases Noticed:

Alberta Teachers' Association v. Information and Privacy Commissioner (Alta.) et al., [2011] 3 S.C.R. 654; 424 N.R. 70; 519 A.R. 1; 539 W.A.C. 1; 2011 SCC 61, refd to. [para. 10].

Khosa v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2009] 1 S.C.R. 339; 385 N.R. 206; 2009 SCC 12, refd to. [para. 10].

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. 10].

Manz v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Tribunal (B.C.) et al. (2009), 267 B.C.A.C. 99; 450 W.A.C. 99; 91 B.C.L.R.(4th) 219; 2009 BCCA 92, folld. [para. 10].

Victoria Times Colonist v. Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada, Local 25-G et al. (2009), 272 B.C.A.C. 141; 459 W.A.C. 141; 310 D.L.R.(4th) 367; 2009 BCCA 229, not folld. [para. 10].

Juneja et al. v. Registrar of Motor Vehicle Services (Alta.) (2008), 459 A.R. 348; 2008 ABQB 573, refd to. [para. 11].

Ryan v. Law Society of New Brunswick, [2003] 1 S.C.R. 247; 302 N.R. 1; 257 N.B.R.(2d) 207; 674 A.P.R. 207; 2003 SCC 20, appld. [para. 11].

Dodd v. Registrar of Motor Vehicle Services (Alta.) (2010), 500 A.R. 38; 2010 ABQB 506, folld. [para. 12].

Newfoundland and Labrador Nurses' Union v. Newfoundland and Labrador (Treasury Board) et al., [2011] 3 S.C.R. 708; 424 N.R. 220; 317 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 340; 986 A.P.R. 340; 2011 SCC 62, refd to. [para. 13].

Viking Logistics Ltd. v. Workers Compensation Board (B.C.) et al., [2010] B.C.T.C. Uned. 1340; 14 B.C.L.R.(5th) 176; 2010 BCSC 1340, not folld. [para. 15].

Pepper v. Transportation Safety Board (Alta.) et al. (2006), 403 A.R. 56; 2006 ABQB 303, appld. [para. 20].

Thomson v. Alberta (Transportation and Safety Board) - see Gonzalez v. Driver Control Board (Alta.) et al.

Gonzalez v. Driver Control Board (Alta.) et al. (2003), 330 A.R. 262; 299 W.A.C. 262; 2003 ABCA 256, appld. [para. 21].

Gonzalez v. Driver Control Board (Alta.) et al. (2001), 328 A.R. 111; 2001 ABQB 757, consd. [para. 21].

Baker v. Transportation Safety Board (Alta.) (2004), 355 A.R. 144; 2004 ABQB 244, refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. Silver (1977), 22 N.S.R.(2d) 259; 31 A.P.R. 259 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

Moll v. College of Alberta Psychologists (2011), 510 A.R. 48; 527 W.A.C. 48; 2011 ABCA 110, refd to. [para. 48].

Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 817; 243 N.R. 22; 174 D.L.R.(4th) 193, refd to. [para. 53].

Easton v. Alberta (Transportation Safety Board), [2005] A.R. Uned. 490; 2005 ABQB 358, refd to. [para. 53].

Canadian Union of Public Employees et al. v. Ontario (Minister of Labour), [2003] 1 S.C.R. 539; 304 N.R. 76; 173 O.A.C. 38; 2003 SCC 29, refd to. [para. 53].

Statutes Noticed:

Traffic Safety Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. T-6, sect. 47.1(3) [para. 9].

Counsel:

Dane F. Bullerwell (Pringle Macdonald), for the applicant;

Fiona N. Vance (Shores Jardine LLP), for the respondent, Alberta (Transportation and Safety Board);

Sarah Dolgoy (Alberta Justice), for the respondent, Registrar of Motor Vehicle Services.

This application was heard on June 8, 2012, by Graesser, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Edmonton, who delivered the following judgment on July 5, 2012.