Abstract
In Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, the Supreme Court of Canada attempted to bring clarity and coherence to Canadian administrative law, an area of legal doctrine long characterized by uncertainty and confusion. The focus in Vavilov was on substantive review, where the “merits” of an administrative decision are challenged in judicial review proceedings. Most judicial review cases in Canada involve substantive review of matters ranging from the grant or refusal of passports to national telecommunications policy and turn on whether a decision was, in whole or in part, incorrect or unreasonable. Challenges to the procedural fairness of a decision-making process, or the general structure of an administrative agency, are comparatively rarer. Unfortunately, substantive review — the task Canadian courts are most often asked to undertake — is the area which has been wracked by uncertainty and confusion.
Citation Information
Daly, Paul.
"Vavilov and the Culture of Justification in Contemporary Administrative Law."
The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference
100.
(2021).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.60082/2563-8505.1422
https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/sclr/vol100/iss1/13
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.