Court of Appeal

Decision Information

Decision Content

                           NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL

Citation: Capital District Health Authority v. Nova Scotia Government and General Employees Union, 2006 NSCA 85

 

                                                                                                     Date: 20060707

                                                                                               Docket: CA 261813

                                                                                                 Registry:  Halifax

 

 

Between:

                                  The Capital District Health Authority

                                                                                                              Appellant

                                                             v.

 

                                     The Nova Scotia Government and

                                           General Employees Union

                                                                                                           Respondent

 

 

 

 

 

Judge:                  The Honourable Justice Thomas Cromwell

 

Appeal Heard:      June 5, 2006

 

Subject:                Judicial review - standard of review - interest arbitration board  functus officio

 

Summary:             An interest arbitration board set wage rates for a three year period.  The rates included both a catch-up and an across the board component. The parties did not agree on how to implement the catch-up component.  The employer asked the board to address the matter further while the union took the position that the board was functus officio because it had already finally decided the matter.  The board issued a supplemental award but it was quashed on judicial review because the judge found the board was functus as the union claimed.  The employer appealed.

 

 


Issues:                 1.  What is the applicable standard of judicial review?

2.  Did the board make a reviewable error?

 

Result:                  Appeal allowed and the boards supplemental award restored.  The applicable standard of review was reasonableness.  The board did not make a reviewable error in issuing its supplemental award.  It reasonably concluded that its main award had not accurately expressed its manifest intent, and accordingly, the board was entitled to issue its supplementary award to do so.

 

 

 

 

This information sheet does not form part of the courts judgment.  Quotes must be from the judgment, not this cover sheet.  The full court judgment consists of 18 pages.

 

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.